Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2007 (9) TMI 568

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cticides and pesticides were exempted. The applicant was also registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Central Act") and was entitled to purchase raw material at concessional rate of tax after issuing form C. During the year under consideration, the applicant had purchased isoprotone and melathine for Rs. 14,16,920 from outside the State of U.P. Instead of using such isoprotone and melathine in the manufacturing of insecticides and pesticides, the applicant had sold such isoprotone and melathine as such for Rs. 17,81,051 against from IIIB and deposited the tax on such sales. The assessing authority issued the notice under section 10A of the Central Act with the allegation that the applicant had viola .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y of penalty has been upheld but it was reduced to Rs. 5,000 as token penalty. The first appellate authority has accepted the explanation of the applicant and held the default as a technical default only. Being aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeal before the Tribunal. The applicant has not filed any appeal. The Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the first appellate authority and restored the order of the assessing authority. As a result of the Tribunal order, penalty levied by the assessing authority at Rs. 85,000 has been restored. Heard Sri Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nimai Das, learned Standing Counsel. With .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... applicant was authorised to use the raw materials only in the manufacturing of insecticides and pesticides and was not authorised to sell such raw materials. The action of the applicant was a clear case of violation of the provisions of clause (d) of section 10 of the Central Act. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the order of the Tribunal and the authorities below. Section 10(d) of the Central Act read as follows: "10. Penalties.-If any person-(a) to (c) . . . (d) after purchasing any goods for any of the purposes specified in clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (3) of section 8 fails, without reasonable excuse, to make use of the goods for any such purpose;" There is no dispute that the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates