AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition is directed against the impugned revisional order dated 31.01.2007 affirming the order passed by Appellate Authority which has
upheld the order of Check Post Officer levying penalty under Section 45-A(12) of the Chhattisgarh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 (for brevity 'Act of
1994').
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that all the three lower authorities have clearly missed out the fact that there was no intent to
evade tax and, therefore, erred in imposing penalty under Section 45-A(12) of the Act of 1994.
Per contra, learned State counsel would support the impugned order and submit that concurrent finding recorded by three authorities are based on
material available on record and it is neither perverse nor contrary to record, therefore, writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records with utmost circumspection.
The Supreme Court in the matter of Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. vs. J.U. Pesticides And Chemical Pvt. Ltd. 1 has held that if fact finding
authority comes to certain conclusions honestly and bonafide, the mere fact that Court may have a different perspective of that question, cannot be a
ground to interfere with the finding, even though another view may be possible.
Reverting to the facts of the present case in light of principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of J.U. Pesticides And Chemical
Pvt. Ltd. (supra), it is quite vivid that finding recorded by Check Post Officer imposing penalty under Section 45-A(12) of the Act of 1994 is a finding
of fact based on material on record, which has rightly been affirmed by Appellate and Revisional authority respectively. I do not find any illegality or
perversity in the impugned order.
As a fallout and consequence of above stated discussion, the writ petition deserves to and accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their
own cost(s).