https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166383 Where the vehicle in-charge carried the required documents and the tax had already been paid, the Rajasthan HC held that the mere absence of the departmental seal did not justify penalty under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Treating the relevant penalty provision as directory, and relying on the corresponding earlier Division Bench view under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, the Court found no basis to infer an intention to evade tax when the documents were available at the time of checking. The penalty was therefore not sustainable. en-us Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2014 12:42:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166383 Where the vehicle in-charge carried the required documents and the tax had already been paid, the Rajasthan HC held that the mere absence of the departmental seal did not justify penalty under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Treating the relevant penalty provision as directory, and relying on the corresponding earlier Division Bench view under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, the Court found no basis to infer an intention to evade tax when the documents were available at the time of checking. The penalty was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166383