ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) In penalty proceedings, the Tribunal has restored the order of the assessing authority, imposing 40% penalty upon the excess quantity of goods found to be transported against Form 31. The order of the first appellate authority holding the assessee liable to thrice the amount of tax of the excess goods has been set aside.
(2.) From the record, it appears that assessee is a registered dealer, who had imported scrap weighing 19750 Kg. The import was accompanied by supporting documents. The vehicle was intercepted, and was weighed by the authorities at Weighment Centre. The gross weight was determined at 35865 Kg. including weight of vehicle. A second weight was taken at a different weighing centre, wherein gross weight increased to 43880 Kg. Both the figures were collected by the authorities themselves. The assessee disputed the weight disclosed in the second weighbridge, and asked for a fresh weighment. Such request, however, was not accepted. The first appellate authority came to the conclusion that in the event there are two conflicting figures available, then the one which favours the assessee is liable to be relied upon. For excess quantity of scrap found to be transported, the first appellate authority awarded penalty of thrice the amount of tax on excess quantity. It is this order, which has been set aside in second appeal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the weight of vehicle was ascertained by the authorities themselves, and in case there were two conflicting reports, then the one which favoured the assessee was liable to have been accepted.;