9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b has approached this court by filing this appeal under section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity "the Act") challenging order dated December 18, 2008 (A7) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for brevity "the Tribunal") holding that issuance of notice to the consignee of the goods as per the amended provisions of section 14B(7)(iii) of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arged in the bill. The CST/ ST No. of the consignor and consignee was very well mentioned in the bill. The driver had the GR also on which there was reference of the bill and value thereof. The names of the consignor and the consignee were also there in the GR. CST forms had been later on sent by the Mysore party to the present appellant and sale had been duly accounted for. Even though driver did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct view that the order of penalty imposed by the appellate authority is vitiated. The Tribunal has otherwise found on merits that all other documents were complete in all respects and were in the possession of the person in charge of the vehicle. Therefore, penalty could not be imposed as no intention to evade tax could be inferred. In such a situation non-reporting at the ICC barrier loses signi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
