Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R.R. Kapoor, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This revision has been filed under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act, which relates to assessment year 1995 -96. The question, which has been argued before this Court, is: Whether in the facts and circumstances, levy of penalty under Section 15A(1)(a) was justified or not -
(2.) APPARENTLY , in my view, this by itself is not a question of law, but, in any case unless it can be shown that findings recorded by Court below are perverse or that there is a breach of any provision, no interference is warrant. However, the question, which actually argued is, "whether revisionist was successful in rebutting presumption, which was drawn by revenue on account of non -endorsement of transit pass at the time of alleged exit of vehicle, transporting goods in question, from State of Uttar Pradesh, so as to wriggle out of liability of penalty."
(3.) IN the present case revisionist placed before Assessing Authority a certificate issued by M/s. J.K. Industries Ltd. on 17.6.1998 to the following effect: This is to certify that we have received materials in full vice & Invoice No. MTD/9111 dt. 10.7.95, TTD/6355 dt. 10.7.95 and TFD/10870 dt. 10.7.95 through the transporter M/s. E.T.T. On 18.7.95 vide their consignment note No. 4024982 dt. 10.7.95. Truck No. MP07G -0457.;