Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (6) TMI 1009

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r that the declaration form was produced on the same day on June 23, 1999 when the vehicle was intercepted, in the light of the judgment rendered by the honourable apex court in the case of State of Rajasthan and another Versus DP. Metals (and other appeals) [2001 (10) TMI 881 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and in the light of the rule 54 of the RST Rules, which postulate that principle of natural justice demand that an opportunity should be given and therefore, it is a clear cut case where the declaration form, though mandatory, required to be carried with the vehicle but the driver/vehicle incharge forgot to carry the same, which was immediately produced on demand that too on same day. Therefore, in the light of judgment rendered by Honoura .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... C 365 (Raj); [2002] 3 RLR 255, as follows: (i) Whether requirement of mens rea is relevant for the purpose of determining the liability for penalty in terms of section 78, sub-section (5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 ? (ii) Whether the mens rea is required to be proved as a necessary ingredient for imposition of penalty under sub-section (5) of section 78 on proven violation of sub-section (2) of section 78 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 ? (iii) Whether in view of the amendment to rule 55 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995 pursuant to the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. D. P. Metals [2001] 124 STC 611 (SC), on sufficient cause being shown whether any authority empower .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not required to be proved as necessary ingredient for imposition of penalty under sub-section (5) of section 78, on proving violation of sub-section (2) of section 78 of the RST Act, 1994. After answering the questions in the case of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. [2015] 82 VST 200 (Raj) [FB] and other connected sales tax revisions, were ordered to be sent back and listed before the Bench having jurisdiction to decide the matters, in accordance with the opinion given and the answers provided by the Larger Bench on such opinion, accordingly the instant revision petition is being decided. The brief facts, which can be noticed, are that the goods of respondentassessee were being transmitted on June 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... matter before the Tax Board, who upheld the order of the DC (A) and deleted the penalty. Counsel for the Revenue contended that carrying of the declaration form ST-18C was mandatory, and it ought to have been carried in the vehicle and to be produced at the time of checking of the vehicle, and contended that once the declaration form was not found, providing the same later on was not proper, and the Tax Board was unjustified in coming to the said conclusion. He further contended that the assessee admitted that since the goods were being sent outside the State of Rajasthan, the declaration form ST-18C should have been with the vehicle and thus the order of the Tax Board deserves to be reversed. He further contended that in the light of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1999 when the vehicle was intercepted, in my view, in the light of the judgment rendered by the honourable apex court in the case of D. P. Metals [2001] 124 STC 611 (SC); [2002] 1 SCC 279 and in the light of the rule 54 of the RST Rules, which postulate that principle of natural justice demand that an opportunity should be given and therefore, it is a clear cut case where the declaration form, though mandatory, required to be carried with the vehicle but the driver/vehicle incharge forgot to carry the same, which was immediately produced on demand that too on same day. Certainly in the light of the judgment rendered by the honourable apex court in the case of Guljag Industries v. Commercial Taxes Officer [2007] 9 VST 1 (SC); [2007] 293 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates