B.S. Walia, J. - (1.) VIDE order dated 24.9.2010, VAT Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh, has referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion: - "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case where the contention of the appellant/assessee that the goods had been returned by the dealer i.e. the present applicant/appellant to M/s. Escorts Ltd. Faridabad, on cancellation of the agency and the bills had been duly verified with books of accounts by the assessing authority at the time of assessment, then penalty under Section 14 -B(7)(ii) of PGST Act on the ground that the goods were not accompanied by proper and genuine documents shall be sustainable."
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that truck No. PLS -9349 carrying goods while leaving the State of Punjab was intercepted and checked by the ETO at ICC Shambhu on 06.05.2001. The truck driver reported at the ICC while leaving the State of Punjab. On production of documents relating to the goods i.e. tractor parts the detaining officer observed that the documents were not proper and genuine. A representation was made on behalf of the dealer before the detaining officer and bill book from which bill Nos. 1655, 1656 to 1681 had been issued was produced. However the same was found to be not from the current bill books. The same was also found to be not mentioned in the account books. The matter was reported to the authorized officer, who after going through the facts of the case and hearing counsel for the appellant imposed a penalty of Rs.1,65,000/ - u/s 14 -B(7)(ii) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (in short "the Act") vide order dated 27.11.2001. An appeal filed against order dated 27.11.2001 was dismissed by the Joint Director (Enforcement), Patiala, vide order dated 06.08.2002. A further appeal before the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short 'Tribunal'), was dismissed vide order dated 07.04.2003. Thereafter an application u/s 22(1) of the Act was filed for referring the matter for the opinion of the High Court on 9 questions of law. The Tribunal vide its order dated 21.08.2008 referred only the below mentioned composite question of law for the opinion of the High Court: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case where the contention of the appellant/assessee that the goods had been returned by the dealer i.e. the present applicant/appellant to M/s. Escorts Ltd. Faridabad, on cancellation of the agency and the bills had been duly verified with books of accounts by the assessing authority at the time of assessment, then penalty under Section 14 -B(7)(ii) of PGST Act on the ground that the goods were not accompanied by proper and genuine documents shall be sustainable." The High Court, vide its order dated 30.04.2010 in VATREF No. 2 of 2008 held that the reference made needed further examination by the Tribunal, therefore, remitted the case to the Tribunal for a fresh statement of case and questions to be framed on the basis of facts given in the first order of the Tribunal. It is in the aforementioned circumstances that the brief facts of the case, as have been referred to above, were prepared.
(3.) THE order of reference further mentions that as per argument of the counsel for the appellant, the appellant was agent of M/s. Escorts Ltd. Faridabad. The agency was cancelled vide letter dated 18.07.2000 and goods being carried were not for sale, but were being returned to M/s. Escorts Ltd. Faridabad. A declaration at the ICC had been duly generated and even a written statement was filed before the AETC, explaining the factual as well as legal position. It is in the aforementioned circumstances that the question referred to the High Court for its opinion was formulated and as has been referred to at the outset.;