9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 593X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Ms. Tanvi Sahai, Mr. R.B. Mathur ORDER By The Court:- This petition has been filed impugning the order dated 13.02.2012 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer upholding the order dated 28.07.2007, passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur setting aside the levy of penalty on the respondent-assessee under Section 76(6) of the Rajasthan VAT Act, 2003 (hereinafter 'the Act of 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty under Section 76(6) of the Act of 2003 was levied. The matter was considered by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) in appeal, who taking into consideration the fact that all the requisite documents were in accompaniment of the goods in transit and that no inquiry was held to hold that there was any intent to evade the tax, set aside the order of penalty. More importantly, it was also noted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclude that the documentation by the respondent-assessee was deliberately conceived with an intent to evade the tax and that the penalty had been levied on mere suspicion. I have considered the impugned order dated 13.02.2012 and am of the considered view that as the goods in transit were accompanied by all requisite documents under Section 76(2)(b) of the Act of 2003, the mere incident of the do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the irregularity of an inter-state sale being made by the respondent-assessee's Alwar office to its Morena office. This was beyond his jurisdiction. The overall context of the factual situation obtaining on the record of the case is indicative of a complete absence of any intent to evade the tax. In this view of the matter, I find no occasion to interfere in the present sales tax revisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
