9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (11) TMI 251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of levy of penalty under section 22(6) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 on different legal grounds. 2.. The main submission of Mr. Mehta is that the goods found at business premises on August 6, 1980, were duly recorded in the books of account and there was no excess stock on the basis of which the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer could have levied any penalty. He has pointed out that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being perverse, the penalty is liable to be set aside more so no reasons for levy of the maximum of penalty has been given in the order. An affidavit was also submitted to the Commercial Taxes Officer, Beawar which has totally been ignored by the Sales Tax Tribunal. 4.. The contention of Mr. Bapna, learned counsel for the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer is that one of the partners has given th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the assessing authority it is his duty to make investigation and prove the said document as forged or fabricated or that they do not represent the genuine transaction. It is abhorrent to our sense of justice that a man is penalised without making any inquiry. There may be a case where a false entry has subsequently been made in the books of account. This may happen when the books are in po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could have been inquired but simply after submission of an evidence in the penalty order they cannot be rejected as fabricated bills without making any inquiry. The finding of the Tribunal is perverse as no inquiry was made from the suppliers of the saries, etc., in respect of these purchases of the assessee. Penalty cannot be levied simply on the supposition or presumption and it is the burden o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
