2012 (10) TMI 299

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate of Punjab under Section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 ( in short, "the Act") against the order dated 11.11.2011 passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for brevity, "the Tribunal") whereby the appeal filed by the respondent against the order dated 2.6.2010, Annexure A.4 passed by Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Joint Director (Investigation) Patiala Division, Patiala in Appeal No.4335/08-09 has been allowed. 3. Briefly, the facts as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. On 18.1.2008, two goods vehicles bearing Nos. PB-07T- 1512 and PB-07M-7209 loaded with electrical goods reached at the Information Collection Centre (ICC) of Dhabi Gujran (Patiala). On examination of the documents shown by the driver....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nst the respondent vide order dated 31.1.2008, Annexure A.3. Aggrieved by the order, the respondent filed an appeal under Section 62 of the Act before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Joint Director (Investigation) Patiala Division, Patiala which was dismissed vide order dated 2.6.2010, Annexure A.4. Not satisfied with the order, the respondent filed an appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 11.11.2011, the appeal was accepted by the Tribunal. Hence this appeal by the State of Punjab. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. 5. The Tribunal has, after appreciation of material on record, come to the conclusion that there was no error on the part of the respondent-dealer. It was noti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e described to be a clerical mistake which itself would not be enough to hold that the documents are fake or fabricated or an attempt to evade tax has been made. Man is not infallible. There is nothing on the record to infer or conclude that the goods were meant for resale or use of manufacturing activity of the purchasing party. If the department had produced evidence in proof of the fact that M/s Aerens Entertainment Zone Limited has agreed to sell this project after its completion to a third party, then the matter would have been examined from that angle. In the absence of such evidence, there can be no escape from the finding that the goods were meant for self-consumption as these were to be installed by the consignee in the Festival C....