New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 337 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

2016 (8) TMI 337 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT - TMI - Revision penalty rested on the statement of the driver that the goods were not loaded at the business premises of the revisionist but were loaded at another place in Saharanpur SCN revisionist produced all relevant documents and records tribunal assumed that the transaction in question had not been duly recorded in the books of accounts at the time of consignment and that records were prepared by the revisionist only after the instant proce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ctional fact, existence of which was required for imposition of penalty was clearly absent order of Tribunal unsustainable revision allowed. - Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. - 477 of 2006 - Dated:- 19-7-2016 - Hon'ble Yashwant Varma, J. For the Applicant : Rishi Raj Kapoor,Krishna Agarwal For the Opposite Party : C. S. C ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned standing counsel. The challenge in the present revision is to an order of the Tribunal which whil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ruck who is stated to have made a statement that the goods were not loaded at the business premises of the revisionist but were loaded at another place in Saharanpur. The respondent alleged that there was failure on the part of the revisionist to explain such circumstances which led to the seizure and ultimate imposition of penalty by the assessing authority. From a perusal of the material on record, this Court finds that upon issuance of show cause notice calling upon the assessee to explain wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e bill of transportation and that the transactions even otherwise were duly reflected in the books of accounts of the dealer and that the tax on the said goods had been duly paid. What appears to have weighed with the Tribunal was that the revisionist had closed his business on 31 December 2001 and therefore there was no occasion for him to have consigned any goods after December 2011. It further noted that in the course of survey undertaken on 9 January 2002, it was found that no business of ke .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version