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

2011 (2) TMI 1325

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty was justified in imposing the penalty. The three fact-finding authorities have concurrently held that the tax and penalty is leviable and the said finding is based on legal evidence and within the four corners of law. No case for interference in the revision is made out. Accordingly, the petition is rejected - STRP No. 100 of 2009(TAX) - - - Dated:- 3-2-2011 - KUMAR N. AND RAVI MALIMATH JJ. T.N. Keshava Murthy for the petitioner T.K. Veda Murthy, High Court Government Pleader, for the respondent ORDER This revision is by the assessee challenging the order passed by the authorities levying Central sales tax as well as penalty for the goods sold to an extent of ₹ 2,24,24,991. 2. The assessee is a partnership .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ax (Appeals), Mysore, which came to be dismissed by an order dated August 27, 2004. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred a second appeal to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the order of the lower authorities and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee is before this court in revision. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee, assailing the impugned order, contends that the exemption claimed by the assessee in respect of stock transfer is supported by form F which were filed along with the returns. Merely because in some of the invoices the names of the consignee is mentioned as well as the payment of freight charges is mentioned, it cannot be presumed that the goods transmitted under those .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... records, it is clear that the returns filed is not correct. There is an attempt to evade payment of tax and there is suppression of material. Certainly, it cannot be said to be a bona fide transaction and therefore, the authorities were justified in imposing a penalty and in fact, the penalty is the minimum prescribed under the law. Therefore, no ground is made out for interfering with the order of imposing tax as well as penalty. 5. From the aforesaid materials, it is not in dispute that the assessee is registered as a dealer both under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act. He has a manufacturing unit in Karnataka at Mandya District and a branch office at Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu. The record discloses that h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t was looked into by the inspecting officer, which resulted in the seizure of the records. The entire stock transfer claimed is similar inter-State sales disguised as stock transfer. The assessee has disguised inter-State sales as stock transferred, though the goods have moved as a result of sale directly to the ultimate purchaser. Even the payments are received either on the date of sales or on subsequent dates as could be seen from the ledger extract given by the State Bank of India. The evidence gathered showed that goods were directly sold to the ultimate purchaser with documents of the sale bill raised at the factory in the name of the branch at Coimbatore. The alleged sale bills bearing branch name and address are the documents genera .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that he is not liable to pay the sales tax on stock transfers and hence, he did not pay the same and it is a case of change of opinion by the authorities and under any circumstances not a case for imposing penalty. The aforesaid material and particularly, the documents laid on dearly shows the intention on the part of the assessee to avoid the payment of Central sales tax and misleading the authorities. The contents of form F are also not true. It also discloses the guilty mind. Under these circumstances, the authorities were justified in disallowing the exemption and were justified in imposing penalty. The contention that the penalty imposable under the Act is discretionary and the authorities have to record a reason for imposing penalty .....

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