CWP No. 5627 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 5627 of 2009 Date of decision 19 .8.2009 Ashish Dixit ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Berjeshwar S. Jaswal ,Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl. AG Punjab 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant petition is directed against order dated 18.9.2008 (P7) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for brevity 'the Tribunal') on 18.9.2008. The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that when the vehicle belonging to the petitioner was detained on 21.7.2002 the driver of the vehicle did not possess any document. It had remained undisputed that the body was got fabricated at Moga and the vehicle alongwith the body was leaving the State of Punjab. On the fabricated body fitted on the chassis 12 ½ percent tax is payable. However, the driver did not stop the vehicle at the ICCI barrier and was stopped after chasing. Thereafter, Mr. Ashish Dixit, the petitioner, appeared and stated that the body was got fabricated from a party in Moga. He also made statement that Rs. 80,000/- was paid. He showed his inability to produce the bill. However, lateron a bill was produced showing new body fitted on the chassis from one Jagroop Singh, body-builder of Moga for Rs. 62,500/-. The bill did not show that any tax was charged from the petitioner or was paid or deposited CWP No. 5627 of 2009 2 by Jagroop Singh, the body-builder. The explanation was found to be unsatisfactory and the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner had found contravention of sub clauses 2 and 4 of Section B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity 'the Act') in as much as the petitioner had evaded payment of tax. Accordingly, penalty of Rs. 40,000/- under Section 14 B(7)(iii) of the Act taking the value of the goods at Rs. 80,000/- was imposed. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal and the order passed by the authority was upheld by the Tribunal. We have heard the learned counsel at some length and find that the writ petition lacks merit and is thus liable to be dismissed. The Tribunal as well as all other authorities have recorded a categorical finding that an attempt was made by the petitioner to evade payment of tax which was chargeable @ 12 ½ % percent under the Act. The finding further is that on interception, the petitioner has stated to have got the body fitted from one Jagroop Singh, body-builder, for a sum of Rs. 80,000/-. At the first instance, the petitioner showed his inability to produce any document. However, lateron a bill was produced which did not show payment of any tax. Accordingly an order was passed imposing penalty to the extent of 50%. We find no legal infirmity in the impugned order warranting admission of the petition. The writ petition is wholly without merit and is accordingly dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jaswant Singh) 19.8.2009 Judge okg