<?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>2016 (4) TMI 4 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325890</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 applies where the declaration form required for transport is not duly completed, signed and supported by prescribed documents. A blank signed form is treated as non-compliance with Rule 53 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995, and the breach is complete on that contravention; proof of mens rea is not required. The existence of other transport documents does not cure the defect in the declaration form. On that reasoning, the penalty could be sustained and the deletion of penalty by the appellate authorities was held unsustainable, with the Revenue&#039;s position upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:53:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 4 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325890</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 applies where the declaration form required for transport is not duly completed, signed and supported by prescribed documents. A blank signed form is treated as non-compliance with Rule 53 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995, and the breach is complete on that contravention; proof of mens rea is not required. The existence of other transport documents does not cure the defect in the declaration form. On that reasoning, the penalty could be sustained and the deletion of penalty by the appellate authorities was held unsustainable, with the Revenue&#039;s position upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325890</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>