STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER Vs. SYSTEM PROTECTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the State of Punjab under section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (the VAT Act) against order dated January 29, 2009, annexure A5, passed by the VAT Tribunal, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law :

(2.) At the time of checking at the check-post in Punjab, goods were detained under section 14B(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (1948 Act) and penalty was imposed on the allegation that the respondent, who is a dealer of Delhi, made an attempt to evade tax. The goods were in transit being carried in a vehicle hired by the respondent. The stand of the respondent was that they manufactured the goods and sold the same to M/s. GTL Limited, Mumbai (GTL) who in turn sold it to M/s. India Wireless Technology Limited, Hyderabad (IWTL), who further sold them to M/s. Nokia India (P) Limited (Nokia) in Punjab. The representatives of Nokia and GTL and Harish Chand, employee of the respondent-assessee also appeared and confirmed these facts. However, the plea of sale to GTL, IWTL and then to Nokia was not accepted. The finding of the detaining authority was affirmed on appeal but the Tribunal accepted the plea of the assessee. It was held that there was sale during transit by Nokia to BSNL. Names of the intervening parties were duly mentioned in the document and ultimate consignee was the BSNL. The finding recorded by the Tribunal is as under :

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.