https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166365 Penalty under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable where the transit documents required under Section 78(2)(b) were 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, so it could not by itself establish evasion. With all requisite documents available and no mens rea proved, intention to evade tax could not be inferred. The concurrent appellate finding of absence of mens rea disclosed no illegality, and the penalty order was not interfered with. en-us Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Sep 2014 12:01:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166365 Penalty under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable where the transit documents required under Section 78(2)(b) were 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, so it could not by itself establish evasion. With all requisite documents available and no mens rea proved, intention to evade tax could not be inferred. The concurrent appellate finding of absence of mens rea disclosed no illegality, and the penalty order was not interfered with. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166365