Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1580 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxLevy of penalty - it was found that Form-38 being carried with the goods was not complete in various respects and certain columns specially Column No. 6 relating to the Bill/ Invoice number was unfilled. - Held that:- As far as Section 7 of the Act, 2008 and Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 are concerned, the import from outside into the Territory of India which is exempted from Sales Tax, obviously it is so at the point of entry into the country. It is not as if after delivery of the goods at the destination within the Territory of India if the said goods are further transported to any other part of the country, they would be exempted from tax on sale etc. In the present case the destination of delivery of the telecommunication equipments which was imported from China was Tuglakabad, Delhi, as such, once the goods were delivered to the revisionist at Delhi it is only up to this stage that no tax was leviable under the Act, 2008 and the Act, 1956. Once, it was being transported further to other parts of the country and was being imported in the State of U.P., then the relevant taxation provisions would apply. Different forms are prescribed for being carried during the course of import into the State by road for business purpose or otherwise than in the course of business. In both eventualities Section 50 had to be complied. During the course of such import adherence to Section 50 of the Act, 2008 was must. It is not in dispute that Section 50 of the Act, 2008 was violated as the requisite document which was being carried was not as per Rules, as relevant columns were unfilled. The original records were perused by this Court and it was revealed that not only Column 6 but even Column 8 of the original copy as also other relevant columns were unfilled. Thus, one of the two prerequisites for imposition of penalty under Section 54(1)(14) was satisfied. First Appellate Authority and Tribunal have concurrently recorded a finding based on material on record that there was intent to evade tax as aforesaid which does not require interference in exercise of revisional powers of this Court as it can not be said that they erred in exercising their jurisdiction in this regard. - Levy of penalty confirmed.
|