9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the driver of the goods vehicle explained that these goods have been brought from Surat, Gujarat and he was directed to deliver the goods in Tirchy of Tamilnadu. Therefore, a notice came to be issued asking him to show cause as to why penalty should not be levied. The contravention being, goods have travelled beyond Hubli on the strength of the bill which was valid only up to Hubli. The reply was filed stating that the driver of the vehicle by mistake carried the vehicle further more towards Tirchy. In the meanwhile, he wanted to see his ailing father in his native place i.e. Shidlagatta. At the time, of interception of the goods vehicle, the goods were not been unloaded. This is a transaction from Gujarath to Karnataka against 'C' Form and there was no intention to evade the tax. Neither the consignor nor the consignee had contravened the provisions of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act. After holding an enquiry the Assessing Authority over ruled the objections and imposed penalty of Rs. 1,85,763/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the transporter/assessee preferred an appeal to the First Appellate Authority. 3. The First Appellate Authority was of the view that the authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Hubli to the dealer and 'C' Forms have been issued. Therefore, in no way the State has suffered any loss of tax. There was no intention to evade payment of tax. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order on the ground that there is no contravention nor there is a provision for imposing penalty for such contravention and therefore, no case for interference. 7. This revision petition came to be admitted on 12.8.2013 and the following questions of law are framed for consideration. "(a) As to whether the Tribunal was right in cancelling the minimum penalty imposed due to violation of Section 53(2)(b) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 on the premise that there was no intention to evade tax by the person incharge of the goods vehicle? and (b) As to whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the provisions of Section 53(12(a)(ii) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is not attracted?" 8. The facts are not in dispute. The lorry bearing No.KA-40-4227 was carrying consignment of 11,280 dozen supra flexi revite (MED) tooth brush of the value of Rs. 4,95,294/- from Surat to Hubli. The bill was issued in favour of Colgate Palmolive (I) Limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck post or barrier and give a declaration containing such particulars as may be prescribed in respect of goods carried in the goods vehicle or boat, ship or similar vessel, before any officer-in -charge of the check post or barrier or any other officer as may be empowered by the Government or the Commissioner in this behalf; and (e) stop the vehicle or boat, ship or similar vessel, as the case may be, and keep it stationary as long as may be required by the officer-in-charge of the check post or barrier or the officer empowered as aforesaid, to examine the contents in the vehicle or boat, ship or similar vessel and inspect all records relating to the goods carried, which are in the possession of such driver or other person-in-charge, who shall, if so required, give his name and address and name and address of the owner of vehicle or boat, ship or similar vessel." 10. The sole object of establishment of these check posts is to prevent or check evasion of tax payable under the Act. Therefore, sub-section (2) of Section 53 provides, the owner or person in-charge of a goods vehicle shall carry with him a goods vehicle record, a trip sheet or a log book and carry with him such documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Trichy and the vehicle was parked about 50 kms., away from the border of Tamil Nadu. The vehicle had travelled from Hubli to Siddlaghatta without a valid document. Therefore, there is contravention of section 53(2)(b) of the KVAT Act. 13. The learned counsel for the assessee relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Lundbeck India (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CCT [2013] 49 (II) ITPJ 286, and on an unreported judgment of this Court in the case of State of Karnataka v. G.R.B. Dairy Foods (P.) Ltd. in STRP.No.74 of 2009 dated 20.1.2011. We have gone through the aforesaid two judgments. Those judgments have no application to the facts of this case. Both the cases are not the cases where a vehicle had travelled beyond destination without valid documents. Further it was contended that it is a bona fide mistake committed by the driver of the vehicle. The bona fides could be gathered from the facts that the lorry was brought back to Hubli. The consignment was unloaded and 'C' forms have been issued. Therefore, there was no intention to evade tax. If there was no intention, then penalty cannot be imposed. In support of the case, reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e issued and penalty is imposed is without any substance. 15. In the instant case, the transporter is transporting the goods from Surat to Hubli. The consignee has paid transportation charges for the same. The consignment copy clearly shows the place where the goods have to be unloaded. The transporter is from Hyderabad. If the driver employed by the transporter fails to unload the goods in Hubli and carries the goods nearly 400 kms., beyond Hubli, his explanation that by a bona fide mistake it was carried thus far cannot be accepted. More over the driver of the vehicle has categorically stated that he was asked to transport the goods to Trichy in Tamil Nadu and that is why the lorry was parked in the border of Tamil Nadu at Siddlaghatta. Therefore, it is clear the transporter resorted to the above modus operandi to hoodwink the authorities at the check-post and wanted to pass on the goods to the dealer in Tamil Nadu without paying any tax in the State of Karnataka. It is a different matter if the vehicle was intercepted and the vehicle was brought back to Hubli, goods were unloaded and 'C' Forms were issued, it is an afterthought. In that view of the matter, the assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
