Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Bharat Petrochemicals Saharanpur Versus Commissioner, U.P. Trade Tax, Lucknow

2016 (8) TMI 337 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

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 proceedings were drawn up. Held that: - The impositi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r 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 while upsetting the view taken by the first appellat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 why penalty be not levied, a detailed reply was su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ns 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 kerosene had been carried on by the assessee in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version