https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162062 Penalty under section 65 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 could not be sustained against a selling dealer where the authority failed to prove collusion or deliberate involvement in the use of fake C forms. The assessing authority relied on assumptions without further enquiry or witness evidence, while the appellate findings held that the assessee's complicity was not established. In revisional jurisdiction under section 86, interference was unwarranted because the matter rested on concurrent factual findings and no substantial question of law arose. The revisional challenge therefore failed. en-us Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Feb 2014 12:27:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162062 Penalty under section 65 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 could not be sustained against a selling dealer where the authority failed to prove collusion or deliberate involvement in the use of fake C forms. The assessing authority relied on assumptions without further enquiry or witness evidence, while the appellate findings held that the assessee's complicity was not established. In revisional jurisdiction under section 86, interference was unwarranted because the matter rested on concurrent factual findings and no substantial question of law arose. The revisional challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162062