2016 (8) TMI 1249

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. ORDER By the impugned order penalty has been imposed on both the appellants on the ground that although the appellant is a registered dealer but found non-existent at the time of visit. An investigation was conducted at the premises of the appellants, it was found that the appellant is non-existence and not working from the said premises either in their office or in their godown. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dealer at their premises. In support of their claim, the appellant produced income tax return of the landlord of the premises who has shown the rent received from the appellant on which income tax has been paid. Income tax returns were duly assessed which supports the case of the appellant that the appellant was existence in the said premises till 2008. No contrary evidence has been produced by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X