9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER The present sales tax revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-Department under section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, against the order dated January 28, 2003 passed by the Member, Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") in Appeal No. 1465/2000, whereby the Board has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner-appellant against the order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals), which appeal was allowed by the appellate authority vide the order dated June 7, 2000. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner-Department had preferred the appeal before the Board, which has been dismissed by the Board vide the impugned order. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel Ms. Tanvi Sahay appearing for the learned counsel Mr. R. B. Mathur, for the petitioner tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in case of State of Rajasthan v. D. P. Metals [2001] 124 STC 611 (SC); [2002] 1 SCC 279, the penalty under section 78(5) is leviable under two circumstances, firstly if there is non-compliance with section 78(2) (a), i.e., not carrying the documents mentioned in that clause or, secondly, if false or forged documents or declaration is submitted. In the instant case, the documents were submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
