<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1992 (4) TMI 224 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157032</link>
    <description>Penalty for alleged misuse of C forms under the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as dependent on a culpable element and the absence of reasonable excuse. The Tribunal found that the machinery purchased against C forms was used by a sister concern pursuant to a government policy decision, and that the assessee had no real role in the later manufacture of ghee. On those facts, it inferred absence of mens rea and accepted the explanation as a reasonable excuse. As no contrary finding of mens rea had been recorded by the assessing authority, the penalty was held unjustified and the Tribunal&#039;s view was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:53:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (4) TMI 224 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157032</link>
      <description>Penalty for alleged misuse of C forms under the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as dependent on a culpable element and the absence of reasonable excuse. The Tribunal found that the machinery purchased against C forms was used by a sister concern pursuant to a government policy decision, and that the assessee had no real role in the later manufacture of ghee. On those facts, it inferred absence of mens rea and accepted the explanation as a reasonable excuse. As no contrary finding of mens rea had been recorded by the assessing authority, the penalty was held unjustified and the Tribunal&#039;s view was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>