PIONEER ELECTRONICS Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The assessee-appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (as extended to Chandigarh) (in short, "the PVAT Act") against the order dated 1.10.2014, Annexure A.5 of the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Union Territory, Chandigarh (in short, "the Tribunal") in STA No.17 of 2012 dismissing its appeal, claiming following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. The appellant is a registered dealer under the PVAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short, the "CST Act") It is carrying on the business of trading in electrical and electronics goods at Chandigarh. It filed the statutory returns as also the annual return for the assessment year 2005-06. It claimed certain sales made to registered dealer in the course of interstate sale. In support of its claim, declaration in Form 'C' as given by the purchaser was also produced. The Assessing authority finalized the assessment for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessing authority disallowed two 'C' Forms for sales made to M/s New Saini Electronic, Kurali and M/s Dhawan Video Mohali. The said forms were rejected on the ground that the Excise and Taxation Department of Punjab had not issued these forms to the above said concerns. According to the appellant, during the assessment proceedings, a blank paper was got signed by the assessing authority from its partner on which later on his admission was recorded with regard to in-genuineness of the declaration forms. The appellant in order to avoid litigation deposited the deferential rate of tax. The assessing authority initiated interest and penalty proceedings. The appellant pleaded that for imposition of penalty some material more than what was there in the assessment proceedings should be there. The assessing authority charged interest and penalty vide order dated 2.12.2009, Annexure A.2. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority which was dismissed vide order dated 19.5.2014, Annexure A.3. Still not satisfied, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 1.10.2014, Annexure A.5, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Hence the instant appeal by the assesseeappellant.

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