CWP No. 5627 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CWP No. 5627 of 2009
Date of decision 19 .8.2009
Ashish Dixit ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ... Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Berjeshwar S. Jaswal ,Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl. AG Punjab
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?
M.M.KUMAR, J.
The instant petition is directed against order dated 18.9.2008
(P7) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for brevity ‘the
Tribunal’) on 18.9.2008. The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding
that when the vehicle belonging to the petitioner was detained on 21.7.2002
the driver of the vehicle did not possess any document. It had remained
undisputed that the body was got fabricated at Moga and the vehicle
alongwith the body was leaving the State of Punjab. On the fabricated body
fitted on the chassis 12 ½ percent tax is payable. However, the driver did
not stop the vehicle at the ICCI barrier and was stopped after chasing.
Thereafter, Mr. Ashish Dixit, the petitioner, appeared and stated that the
body was got fabricated from a party in Moga. He also made statement that
Rs. 80,000/- was paid. He showed his inability to produce the bill. However,
lateron a bill was produced showing new body fitted on the chassis from
one Jagroop Singh, body-builder of Moga for Rs. 62,500/-. The bill did not
show that any tax was charged from the petitioner or was paid or deposited
CWP No. 5627 of 2009 2
by Jagroop Singh, the body-builder. The explanation was found to be
unsatisfactory and the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner had
found contravention of sub clauses 2 and 4 of Section B of the Punjab
General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity ‘the Act’) in as much as the
petitioner had evaded payment of tax. Accordingly, penalty of Rs. 40,000/-
under Section 14 B(7)(iii) of the Act taking the value of the goods at Rs.
80,000/- was imposed. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal and the
order passed by the authority was upheld by the Tribunal.
We have heard the learned counsel at some length and find that
the writ petition lacks merit and is thus liable to be dismissed. The Tribunal
as well as all other authorities have recorded a categorical finding that an
attempt was made by the petitioner to evade payment of tax which was
chargeable @ 12 ½ % percent under the Act. The finding further is that on
interception, the petitioner has stated to have got the body fitted from one
Jagroop Singh, body-builder, for a sum of Rs. 80,000/-. At the first instance,
the petitioner showed his inability to produce any document. However,
lateron a bill was produced which did not show payment of any tax.
Accordingly an order was passed imposing penalty to the extent of 50%. We
find no legal infirmity in the impugned order warranting admission of the
petition. The writ petition is wholly without merit and is accordingly
dismissed.
(M.M.Kumar)
Judge
(Jaswant Singh)
19.8.2009 Judge
okg