9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.S.C. ORDER HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. Heard Sri R.R.Kapoor, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri R.S.Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the assessee. 2. This revision under Section 58 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter called as "Act of 2008") has been filed assailing the order dated 18.05.2013 passed by Commercial Tax Tribunal. 3. The revision was adm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment was made and penalty of Rs.3,84,000/- was imposed vide order dated 27.9.2010. Against the said order, first appeal was filed, which was decided vide order dated 29.5.2012 and the quantum of penalty was reduced to Rs.96,811/-. The Assessing Authority on 26.12.2012 while exercising power under Section 31 of the Act of 2008 passed rectification order and held that the order dated 27.9.2010 be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rged in the order of the first Appellate Authority. He further contended that the two bills being Bill No.260 and 194 were mentioned in Form-38 but by mistake bill No.195 was not recorded in Form 38. He however, contends that Bill No.195 mentioned that the goods which were sent, were insured and was recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee as well as with the Mandi Samiti. 7. Per contra, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thorities as well as Tribunal had categorically recorded findings that there was an intention to evade tax by the assessee as the third bill was deliberately not mentioned in From 38 and column was left blank. 10. Moreover, the first Appellate Authority had reduced the quantum of penalty imposed by the Assessing Authority and only penalty have been imposed on the goods which has been transported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
