2026 (9) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Year 2005-06, arising out of penalty proceedings initiated under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The revision was admitted by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2015 wherein following questions of law are involved: "I. Whether in the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal as well as the authority below were justified to levy the penalty under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act, despite the fact that there is no mens rea or any guilty intention in the mind of the applicant revisionist? II. Whether the Tribunal as well as the authority below were justified to levy the tax under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act without establishing any false representation or false statement given by the applicant revis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lief and trust, the revisionist issued Form- C for the purchase of Excavator. He further submits that the revisionist never made a false representation, therefore, the penalty cannot be imposed under Section 10A of the Act. In support of his submission, he relies upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan versus M/s. Jaipur Udyog Ltd, AIR 1973 Supreme Court 843; Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. versus M/s. Sanjiv Fabrics, 2010 NTN (Vol. 44) - 69 and Commissioner of Sales Tax versus S/s. Bhawani Paper Mills Ltd., Allahabad, 2006 U.P.T.C. 328. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel supports the impugned order and submits that the issue in hand pertains to Assessment Year 2005-06, admittedly the revisionis....