9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been filed under section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), challenging the order dated August 2,2007 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the Tax Board") in Appeal No. 131 of 2006. 2. It appears that on January 25, 2004, the vehicle bearing No. RJ-05/G-3093 was checked on Bharatpur-Achnera Road, the said vehic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had filed the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), who quashed and set aside the said order passed by the assessing authority. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Tax Board, which has been dismissed by it vide the impugned order dated August 2, 2007. 3. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the assessing authorities also. In that view of the matter, the learned single judge was right in coming to the conclusion that no intention to avoid tax can be spelt out from the proceedings of the cases. As we have found earlier that no notice to show cause against the breach of sub-section (10A) has been issued nor any ingredient of sub-section (10A) can be spelt out from the show-cause no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to impose the penalty equal to 50 per cent, of the value of the goods, though as noticed by us no case of violation of sub-section (10A) was spelt out in notice under section 78. Thus, penalty came to be imposed without affording opportunity to the driver to defend himself. The levy of penalty thus being in breach of requirements of sub-section (10A) and in breach of principles of natural justice, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
