- (1.) The petitioner has preferred this petition against the order dated 28.2.2017, passed under Section 54 (1) (2) of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008, imposing penalty by 5% of three times of the turnover, which has been suppressed in filing the returns.
(2.) The submission of Sri Piyush Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the aforesaid order has been passed in clear violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as no notice of the aforesaid penalty proceedings were served upon him before passing of the above order and, in fact, the notice was served upon his clerk on 24.3.2017 much after the order was passed. The service of notice by pasting it on some conspicuous business place on 26.2.2017 is not a valid service inasmuch as there is no independent witness to it.
(3.) On merits, he submits that there is no suppression of any turnover by him inasmuch as against the order of assessment wherein higher turnover was taken over assessing the tax liability, a revision is pending in the High Court which has duly been admitted on the question of turnover itself and as such no penalty can be imposed on the ground of suppression of turnover.;