TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubstantiate its claim made in the appeal - no substantial question of law arises - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - VAT Appeal No. 5 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 11-7-2017 - Mr. Ajay Kumar Mittal and Mr. Amit Rawal, JJ. Mr. Navdeep Monga, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab. JUDGMENT The appellant-assessee has filed the instant appeal under Section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, 'the PVAT Act') against the order dated 08.10.2015 ( Annexure A-10 ) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, 'the Tribunal') in Appeal No.86 of 2015, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether on the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and trading of electric home appliances. In the normal course of business, the assessee made an interstate sale of goods i.e. 1410 pieces of electric room heaters to M/s Bajaj Electrical Ltd., Banur vide invoice dated 29.10.2013 for ₹ 16,95,912/-, booked with the Nalagarh Truck Union, Nalagarh for its transport from Baddi (Himachal Pradesh) to Banur (Punjab). The tax as per the CST Act had also been charged @ 1.5%. On 29.10.2013, upto furnishing the information at Baddi in requisite form, the vehicle moved towards its destination i.e. Banur. When the vehicle entered into the limits of Punjab and headed towards the nearest check post for reporting the goods, it was checked at the link road connecting Chhatbir with Banur-Landran Road. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd ₹ 2,42,593/- under Sections 51(7)(c) and 51(12) of the PVAT Act respectively and held that the goods were not accompanied by proper documents and the driver did not report at the nearest ICC while entering into the State of Punjab. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority i.e. the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala [in short, 'the DETC(A)]. After examining the matter, the DETC(A) upheld the order passed by the AETC on the ground that no information was generated at the nearest ICC while entering into the State of Punjab and the assessee had failed to produce the relevant documents. Still not satisfied, the assessee filed second appeal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scape route by the driver was sufficient to draw the inference that the assessee attempted to evade the tax. The Tribunal further noticed that it was a transaction of sale and the Punjab Tax had not been paid. The appellant wanted to reach the premises of the consignee while avoiding all the ICCs and merely payment of 1.5 per cent CST was not sufficient and was an excuse to evade payment of Punjab Tax and also to keep the transaction out of books of account. So far as the imposition of penalty was concerned, the assessee being a consignor was not held for imposition of penalty under Section 51(12) of the PVAT Act. Thus, the Tribunal while partly accepting the appeal correctly maintained the penalty under Section 51(7)(c) of the PVAT Act and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ep the goods out of books of account. In such situation, the non-generation at ICC in violation of Rule 64(c) assumes importance. While exporting or importing the goods in case of sale transaction, the information has to be given in the following manner:- (a) E-ICC is required to be done in both the cases i.e. in case of export of goods outside the State of Punjab (Under Rule 64-B). (b) In case of import of goods into the State of Punjab from outside by air, railway or dry port (Under Rule 64-C). Rule 64-B read with rule 2 (hh) of PVAT Rules, 2005 deals with the procedure for furnishing information under E-ICC system relating to export of goods outside the State of Punjab by any mode of transition. An owner and person i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable, I do not agree to the said contention. Mere payment of 1.5% of tax on account of CST would not be suffice as against the damage which may result on account of bringing the goods into the State of Punjab by way of keeping the same out of the books of account, particularly, when there was an attempt to evade tax, the adoption of the escape route by itself is sufficient to draw the inference that appellant attempted to evade the tax. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant-assessee has not been able to show that the findings recorded by the Tribunal are illegal or perverse or are based on misreading of evidence on record warranting interference by this Court. He has also not been able to produce any material to substantiate its cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
