Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX versus CRAFT TECH NUMERIX PVT.,LTD

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner Trade Tax v. Craft Tech Numerix Pvt.,Ltd - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1511 of 2000 [2007] RD-AH 2016 (7 February 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

By the impugned order, the Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied under Section 13-A (4) of the Act while the goods were in transit in vehicle no. DL-1L/9244 on 14.12.1998, the Vehicle was checked by the Trade Tax Officer (Mobile Squad). The goods were detained and seized on the ground that the Invoices relating to the goods were issued on 30.11.1998 while the goods were dispatched on 14.12.1998.  The goods were subsequently released on furnishing of security.  In pursuance of the seizure of the goods, a penalty proceeding under Section 13-A (3) of the Act was initiated.  Dealer explained that the goods were dispatched late because, the Vehicle was damaged.  However, entries of the goods were duly found entered in the excise register.  The Assessing Authority had not accepted the claim of the dealer and levied the penalty.  The Tribunal has accepted the explanation and deleted the penalty.  The Tribunal held that all the Invoices relating to the goods were duly found entered in the excise register.  The penalty under Section 13-A (4) of the Act can be levied, in case, if the the goods are found omitted to have been entered in the books of account and the register.  In the present case, no such case has been made out, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly deleted the penalty.  Finding of the Tribunal is the finding of fact.  No question of law is involved in the present revision.

In the result, revision fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt:07.02.2007.

MZ/1511/2000.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.