Antony Dominic, J. The revenue has filed this revision challenging the order passed by the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal in TA(VAT) No.534/11, which was dismissed by Annexure C order dated 2/5/14.
2. The respondent is a dealer under the KVAT Act.
Evidently, proceedings under Section 47 of the KVAT Act were initiated and penalty was imposed. That was set aside by the first appellate authority in an appeal filed by the respondent. Further appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal by Annexure C order. This is the circumstance in which the revision is filed.
3. The reason assigned by the Tribunal for dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue is contained in para 7 of its order, which reads thus;
“7. The penalty has been imposed under Section 47(6) of the Act for violation of Section 43(3) read with Rule 58(16). The Enquiry Officer failed to note that the consignment of goods was covered from outside the state with valid
O.T.Revision No.183/14
: 2 :
documents prescribed under CST Act and the same has been duly accounted in the regular books of the accounts of the dealer. There is no evidence to prove that there was an attempt on the part of the dealer to evade payment of tax due to Government. So we are of the opinion that there is no reason to interfere in the orders of the authority below. The state appeal is devoid of merit and is dismissed.”
4. Evidently, having regard to the fact that the goods in question were accompanied by valid documents prescribed under the Central Sales Tax Act and were duly accounted in the books of accounts, Tribunal was justified in concluding that there was no attempt to evade duty. We are not inclined to think that this order suffers from any illegality.
O.T.Revision is dismissed.
Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE