Penalty on incomplete declaration form requires missing material particulars, not a mere inadvertent omission in invoice details.

Penalty under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable where ST-18A otherwise contained the core particulars and only the invoice number and date were left blank. The Court distinguished precedent involving materially incomplete declaration forms and treated the omission as an inadvertent lapse rather than a defect in substance or an indicator of intent to evade tax. It further held that, on these facts, the form could not be treated as reusable in a manner attracting statutory penalty. The deletion of penalty was upheld in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 was sustainable where the declaration form ST-18A was otherwise complete but the invoice number and date were left blank, and whether such omission amounted to violation of Rule 53 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995 indicating an intent to evade tax.

Analysis: The Court held that the governing principle from the precedent on blank declaration forms applies where material particulars such as quality, weight, description of goods and value are left unfilled. On the facts before it, all core particulars were duly filled and only the invoice number and date were omitted, which was treated as an inadvertent lapse rather than a defect going to the substance of the declaration. The Court further held that, in these circumstances, the form could not be treated as capable of reuse in a manner attracting the statutory penalty.

Conclusion: The omission did not constitute failure to furnish material particulars and did not justify penalty under Section 78(5); the deletion of penalty was upheld and the revision was dismissed in favour of the assessee.

---