9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Added Tax Act, 2005 and the Central Sales Tax Act, having its place of business at Vishavkarma Nagar, Mandi Gobindgarh. The appellant being engaged in the business of resale of iron and steel goods, had sold iron pipes to M/s Biksons Engineering Works of Ahmednagar (Maharashtra). The purchasing dealer was duly registered under the State and Central Sales Tax Law. The goods were covered by Invoice No.407 dated 26.02.2009 amounting to Rs.4,06,504/- + CST @ 4% (Rs.16,260/-) (Annexure A-1). Those goods were also covered by G.R. No.465 dated 26.02.2009 (Annexure A-2) and the same were loaded in vehicle No. PB- 23F-1285. When the goods were on the way from Mandi Gobindgarh to Ahmed Nagar, the ETO, Mobile Wing, Patiala, detained the same under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t on the ground that the goods were loaded from the premises of M/s K.S. Steel Tubes. However, no steps were taken against M/s K.S. Steel Tubes, who as per department, was the true owner of those goods. The driver of the vehicle had not crossed the ICC of Punjab State and was still in the territory of Punjab at the time of detention. Documents (Annexures A-1 and A-2) produced by the driver were the only documents, which were required to be produced before leaving the State of Punjab. The oral statement given by the driver that the goods were loaded from the premises of M/s K.S. Steel Tubes cannot be made a ground to impose penalty. He has further argued that the appellant was the owner of the goods. The appellant had got the vehicle, along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the limits of Punjab and transaction would have been gone unaccounted. The invoice, which the driver was carrying, could not be called a genuine document at all and therefore, the designated officer had rightly imposed penalty under Section 51 (7) (b) of the Punjab VAT Act. Learned State counsel has further argued that apart from the statement given by the driver, statement of Manoj Sehgal, Manager of M/s K.S. Steel, leads to only one conclusion that the computerized invoice was used by the petitioner to show that inter-state sale was being made. The vehicle was intercepted on 26.02.2009 and thereafter, the goods were leased on 27.02.2009 by furnishing the bank guarantee. The relevant documents along with written submissions were shown to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been produced, rather it was a computerized invoice, which was produced after a gap of almost 10/20 days. Hence, the penalty has been rightly imposed upon the appellant, as the computerized invoice could have been easily destroyed. In Krish Pack Industries' case (supra), the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal did not consider the explanation of the petitioner that there was no attempt to evade the tax and the matter was remanded back to pass a fresh order after examining the documents available on record. In the facts of the present case, the driver had produced the invoice as well as G.R. The invoice was computerized one. The fact that the goods were loaded from the premises of M/s K.S. Steel Tubes was also substantiated by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
