Revisionsist challenged the Tribunal's sustaining of a penalty for description discrepancy in goods. Court dismissed the revision, finding the Tribunal's recording of facts regarding identity misimplication was not warranting interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 38
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 726 of 2009
Revisionist :- M/S Woodland Timber Store
Opposite Party :- The Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow. Counsel for Revisionist :- Suyash Agarwal
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
"(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct to restore the penalty of Rs.16,000/- u/s 13-A(4) of the Act when the goods were duly accorded for in the books of accounts."
physical verification the goods loaded on the truck bearing registration no.HR-38A-3238 were 'Sagon' wood.
Order Date :- 6.7.2022 S.Chaurasia
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM CHAURASIA Date: 2022.07.07 17:10:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was correct to restore the penalty when the goods were described differently from those found on the truck.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S Woodland Timber Store
The Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
