Heard Shri B.K.Pandey, learned counsel for the State.
The revision has been filed against the order dated 12.03.2014 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bench-II, Ghaziabad in Second Appeal No. 01 of 2012 (year 2010-2011 under Section 54(1)(14).
The revision was admitted on the following questions of law:-
"(i). Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commercial Tax Tribunal was legally justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 54(1)(14) of U.P. Value Added Tax Act?"
Tribunal has recorded finding of fact that goods was imported from Rajasthan, sale form of the dealer, bill, Form 38 accompanied the goods, payment was made by cheque, thus it cannot be said that there was intention to evade tax merely for the reason that Column 6 of Form 38 was left blank.
This Court in judgment delivered on 25.09.2014 in Sales Tax Revision No. 441 of 2014 (The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. Lko. Versus S/S. Dabur India Ltd. 22 Site-4 Ind Area Sahibabad) held that where the goods in question were duly accounted for in the books of account, it was accompanied with branch transfer documents, thus, there is no intention to evade payment of tax. The findings recorded by the tribunal are finding of fact.
In the absence of any intention to evade payment of tax penalty was not imposable. The revision is misconceived and is, therefore, dismissed.
Order Date :- 16.10.2014 IB