9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivered by AJAY KUMAR MITTAL J.-This appeal has been filed by the assesseeappellant under section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated December 4, 2009 (annexure A3) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as, "the Tribunal") in Appeal (VAT) No. 274 of 2008-09, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6-07. On scrutiny of returns and the ICC data, it was found that certain returns were not correct and the turnover was suppressed to evade tax. The designated officer issued notice under section 46 of the Act on March 7, 2007, to the assessee for producing the books of account and for appearance. The assessee did not appear before the designated officer despite various notices. On September 19, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Amritsar II, was requested to verify the sales by that dealer who vide letter dated March 28, 2007, informed that as per the returns filed by M/s. Vikas Trading Co., it had not made any sale to the assessee. Accordingly, notice dated December 26, 2007 was issued to the dealer for January 8, 2008. The tax, interest and penalty figures totalling Rs. 18, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the appellant without affording an opportunity to cross-examine the said person and, therefore, the impugned orders are untenable. The only plank of the case of the appellant was that there were purchases from M/s. Vikas Trading Company, Amritsar. In such a situation, it was incumbent upon the appellant to have proved the veracity and authenticity of the said transaction by examining its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not have any such proof because the payments were made in cash. The designated officer concluded that M/s. Bhagwan Dass Chandgi Ram was falsely claiming input-tax credit to which he was not entitled and that it will be in the interest of justice and the revenue that he is made liable to pay purchase tax on these purchases of wheat totalling Rs. 1,62,68,249." In view of the aforesaid findings whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
