9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the revisional authority was justified in setting aside the order of the first appellate authority by holding that the prescribed delivery note under Rule 157(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules 2005, did not accompany the movement of goods and no sufficient cause was shown to the Chek Post Officer at the time of checking of the vehicle and that any other document, though containing all the details of business transactions cannot be accepted?" 3. In view of the question of law that has been framed, the question for consideration is as to whether the penalty imposed on the assesse would be justified in the present facts and circumstances of the case, when a finding has been rendered by the authorities that the requisite document had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods were not for sale, the provision in Section 157(i)(c) of the Act was applicable and in that view, Form VAT-515, which had accompanied the goods, was sufficient. 6. Insofar as the reliance placed by the revenue, to the notification dated 08.08.2008, it is contended that it would not be applicable to the present facts, since the goods being transported is not for sale. In that view, it is contended that even otherwise, on the issue of notice the Form VAT-505 has been subsequently submitted, which has been taken into consideration by the First Appellate Authority and therefore, the imposition of the penalty is not justified. 7. The case of the Revenue is entirely based on the notification dated 08.08.2008 to contend that even in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel for the assessee that the same is not justified, since the notification has been issued under Rule 157(i)(a) also cannot be accepted. That is so, from a perusal of Forms VAT-505 and VAT-515, it is seen that both are relatable to Rule 157(i)(a) of the Act. Therefore, insofar as the appropriate Form that was required to accompany, the non-ferrous metal which was being transported in the instant case, we are of the considered opinion that Form VAT-505 was required to be produced, when the vehicle was intercepted to verify the documents that was being carried along with the goods that was being transported. 10. Having arrived at the above conclusion, regarding the question with regard to the manner in which the penalty has been impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee to contend otherwise, more particularly in a circumstance when the initial contention was that the notification dated 08.08.2008 itself would not apply to them. Therefore, if these aspects are kept in view, the view taken by the Division Bench in STA No.79/2009, dated 19th July 2011, would disclose that once it is seen that the required document had not accompanied the goods, the levy of penalty would be justified. In the instant case, as already noticed, the original authority i.e., the Commercial Tax Officer as well as the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, while arriving at the conclusion have also taken note of the manner in which the reduced penalty has been imposed. Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
