https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165450 Penalty under section 78(10A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable where the required documents under section 78(2)(b) were available and produced at the time of checking, and tax had already been paid. The absence of a check-post seal was treated as a directory, not mandatory, requirement under the statutory scheme. In the presence of complete documents, intention to evade tax could not be inferred, and the concurrent finding that there was no mens rea on the part of the assessee was accepted. No interference was called for. en-us Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:00:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165450 Penalty under section 78(10A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable where the required documents under section 78(2)(b) were available and produced at the time of checking, and tax had already been paid. The absence of a check-post seal was treated as a directory, not mandatory, requirement under the statutory scheme. In the presence of complete documents, intention to evade tax could not be inferred, and the concurrent finding that there was no mens rea on the part of the assessee was accepted. No interference was called for. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165450