IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 03.07.2025 M/s Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. ….Appellant Vs.

The State of Punjab and another ….Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present:- Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents.

*****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

1. The present appeal is preferred under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax, 2005 (for short, ‘PVAT Act’) against the order dated 20.02.2017 (Annexure A-8) passed by Punjab Value Added Tax Tribunal (for short, ‘Tribunal’) in Appeal No.158 of 2016, vide which penalty to the tune of Rs.14,16,558 imposed under Section 51(7)(b) of the PVAT Act by the Designated Officer, Zirakpur, vide order dated 21.10.2015, has been confirmed.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant sent a consignment containing Nivea Cream to its branch office at Baddi, Himachal Pradesh through Truck bearing registration No.HP-30A-1255.

The truck reached at Information Collection Centre, Zirakpur, on

10.10.2015, transporting the consignment from Zirakpur to Baddi.

3. That on asking, driver of the vehicle produced Invoice-cum- Delivery Challan no.7000308003 and 7000308000 dated 09.10.2015 alongwith GR No.240501 dated 09.10.2015 showing the transaction as ‘Stock Transfer’ from Zirakpur to M/s Godrej Consumer Products Limited, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, disclosing the description of goods as “Nivea Soft Cream” 25ML-Rs.49/-FRWEzee 1 Kg Jar P60, Qty in Pcs. 2,00,000, value per piece @ 0.01 with Gross turnover of Rs.2,600/-. Likewise same particulars were disclosed in another challan bearing No.7000308000 except quantity (39,999 Pcs.) and Gross amount Rs.519.99/-.

4. The said goods were covered vide Stock Transfer Notes dated 09.10.2015 for an amount of Rs.3119.99/- as the said goods were meant for sales promotion scheme to be given against purchase of Ezee detergent. Alongwith the Stock Transfer Note, Goods Receipt dated 09.10.2015 issued by Shree Balaji Transolutions Pvt. Ltd. was also accompanying the goods.

5. That accordingly to verify the genuineness of documents produced, goods were detained under Section 51(6)(a) of the PVAT conveying the discrepancies that “Goods are meant for trade covered with Invoice/Delivery Challan. Estimated price per unit and total estimated value of the goods seems negligible as compared to the value of goods. The genuineness of the produced documents is suspicious. Needs verification along with account books”. Statement of the driver admitting the above facts was recorded and notice to the appellant through driver of the vehicle was issued for 12.10.2015.

6. In response to the notice, on 13.10.2015, Shri K.C.Thakur, Assistant Manager of the firm, alongwith Advocate of the firm appeared. They were confronted with the facts of the case that value of goods is negligible as per the documents produced covering the goods. They admitted that the value of the goods is wrongly mentioned in the produced documents. Further, they admitted that actual value of the goods is Rs.47,24,980/-. And that purchase of the goods was done by the firm from M/s Nivea India (P) Ltd, Mumbai. The invoice of the above referred to business transaction (Invoice No.90043473 dated 25.09.2015) was submitted by him. Shri K.C.Thakur was confronted that as per the produced invoice, the value of a single unit of Nivea Soft Cream comes out to be Rs.19.68/-. Hence, the actual value of the goods is Rs.47,24,980/-, whereas, the value declared was Rs.3,119.99/-. Therefore, under declaration, the value of the goods was Rs.47,21,860/-. Shri K.C.Thakur failed to produce any account books from where the genuineness of the business transactions could be examined. After finding it a fit case of penalty, Detaining Officer forwarded the case file to the Excise and Taxation Officer, Zirakpur, for taking penal action under Section 51(7)(b) of