https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333617 Mandatory compliance with Rule 50 governing search and seizure under Section 77 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was treated as essential, and the concurrent findings were that the procedure was not followed because no two witnesses were present and only the director's statement was recorded. The authorities also found that the goods were excisable and that tax had been charged in the bill. In the absence of perversity or legal error, those factual findings did not raise any substantial question of law in revision, and the penalty deletion was upheld; the Revenue's revision failed. en-us Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333617 Mandatory compliance with Rule 50 governing search and seizure under Section 77 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was treated as essential, and the concurrent findings were that the procedure was not followed because no two witnesses were present and only the director's statement was recorded. The authorities also found that the goods were excisable and that tax had been charged in the bill. In the absence of perversity or legal error, those factual findings did not raise any substantial question of law in revision, and the penalty deletion was upheld; the Revenue's revision failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333617