9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 455X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter, "the Act of 2003") read with section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (for short, "the Act of 1994") arises from the order dated October 12, 2010 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, whereby the Tax Board has upheld the order dated July 10, 2006 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), 1st, Jaipur setting aside the levy of tax, surcharge and penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act of 1994 according to the assessing officer. On proceedings taken, the assessing officer imposed a penalty under section 78(10A) of the Act of 1994 on the driver on September 18, 2003. The assessee's appeal against the order imposing penalty was allowed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), 1st, Jaipur, inter alia, holding that in simultaneous proceedings in respect of the same inciden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, is of no avail for the success of this revision petition, inasmuch as the Rajasthan Tax Board has addressed the issue independently of the reasonings of the appellate authority. It has been found as a matter of fact from the record of the case by the Rajasthan Tax Board that all requisite documents mandatorily required under section 78(2)(a) of the Act of 1994 in accompaniment of the goods in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on and there was nothing illegal about the same. Further in any view of the matter, merely because the seal of the check-post was not affixed on the documents in issue, it was not sufficient to warrant levy of penalty under section 78(10A) of the Act of 1994 as held by the Division Bench of this court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Tajiander Pal reported in [2003] 6 Tax Update, Part 3, Page ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
