HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 131 of 2023 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. Heard Shri B.K. Pandey, learned ACSC for the revisionist. In view of the Office report dated 01.07.2025, the service of notice upon the opposite party is deemed to be sufficient. When the matter is taken, neither any Vakalatnama has been filed, nor anybody appears on behalf of the opposite party to argue the case. The instant revision has been filed against the impugned order dated 12.07.2023 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2011-12 arising out the proceedings under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The above-noted revision was admitted by this Court vide order dated 26.10.2023 on the following question of law:- ""i. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal is legally justified in passing the order, quashing the demand of penalty against the tax payer levied upon him due to fraudulent procurement of plant and machineries on subsidized rates on the basis of form-C in violation of Section 10-A (b) & (c) of Central Sales Act." Learned ACSC submits that the opposite party has taken the registration for manufacture and sale of ice. Under the garb of the central registration, Form - C was issued for purchase of plant & machinery at a concession rate, but no manufacture and sale was disclosed and therefore, the proceedings under Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : C.S.C. Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : The Commissioner Commercial Tax, U.P. .....Revisionist(s) M/S Prem Ice And Preservation Pvt. Ltd. .....Opposite Party(s) section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act were initiated against the opposite party and penalty was imposed, against which first appeal was preferred, which has been dismissed. Thereafter, the opposite party preferred a second appeal, which has illegally been allowed. Learned ACSC further submits that the opposite party has constructed the Cold Storage for the purpose of storage of potato, etc., but the registration was taken for manufacture and sale of ice and no sale of ice was disclosed. He further submits that the Tribunal, without reversing the finding in the impugned order, has allowed the appeal illegally. After hearing learned ACSC, the Court has perused the record. The record shows that the registration was granted for manufacture and sale of ice. When the authorities found no disclosure of manufacture and sale of ice for which plant & machinery was purchased, after issuing Form - C, penalty proceedings under section 10-A of the Act were initiated. The penalty order was affirmed by the first appellate authority on the ground that no sale of ice was disclosed by the opposite party. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, without reversing the said finding of fact against the opposite party, has allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty. Therefore, the penalty set aside by the Tribunal cannot be sustained as the findings of fact recorded against the respondent have not been reversed by the Tribunal. In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The same is hereby set aside. The revision succeeds and is allowed. The question of law is answered in favour of the revisionist and against the opposite party - assessee. September 4, 2025 Amit Mishra STRE No. 131 of 2023 2 (Piyush Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad