Penalty for VAT non-payment fails where disclosure, timely deposit, and no intent to evade are shown.

Penalty under section 61 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was not justified where the assessee disclosed VAT liability in the challans, deposited tax within the time allowed by the governing notification, and the record showed no concealment or intent to evade tax. The Tax Board's deletion of penalty was treated as a factual finding supported by the material on record, and no perversity was shown. The HC therefore upheld deletion of the penalty and declined the Revenue's challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 61 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was justified on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The assessee had disclosed in the challans that VAT was payable as per schedule, if applicable, and the record showed that tax was deposited within the time permitted by the governing notification. The tax authority's conclusion was based on a survey conducted before expiry of the period for payment, while the Tax Board found that there was no concealment and no material indicating an intention to evade tax. The finding deleting penalty was treated as a factual conclusion supported by the record, and no perversity was shown.

Conclusion: Penalty under section 61 was not warranted and the deletion of penalty was upheld in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed because the penalty order was not sustainable on the facts, and the interference sought by the Revenue was declined.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for tax non-payment is not sustainable where the material on record shows disclosure, timely compliance within the permitted period, and no intention to evade tax.

---