1996 (7) TMI 525

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Central Flying Squad II, Jaipur (respondent) imposed penalty of Rs. 36,531 under section 22A(7), Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (in short, "the old Act"). 2.. The facts of the case giving rise to the application for revision may be summarised thus: 2,200 bundles of safety matches were loaded in truck No. TN: 28 5171 from different manufacturers of Sivakasi (Tamil Nadu). On September 25, 1991, at 6.30 a.m., it was checked on Alwar-Delhi road near Alwar. On enquiry, the driver of the said truck, Ramaswami disclosed that 1,100 bundles were to be unloaded at Kalsada (Alwar) and remaining 1,100 bundles were to be carried to Delhi. On examination of the documents, it was found that the sales tax registration number of M/s. Sunderwal Match Indus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tined to Kalsada, Alwar (M/s. Rakesh Trading Company) and 1,100 bundles were to be delivered to M/s. Sunderwal Match Industries Private Limited, Delhi, the names of the consignors and the consignees were duly mentioned in all these documents, the goods vehicle record was prepared by the transporter and not by the consignors and no opportunity of hearing was given either to the consignees or to the consignors before imposing penalty. He lastly contended that no enquiry was made in the matter and on this ground alone the order of penalty deserves to be set aside. 4.. In reply, it was contended that no question of law is involved in this case, there is a concurrent finding of three lower authorities that the documents furnished were false and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he record to indicate that M/s. Sunderwal Match Industries Private Limited, Delhi and Sivakasi were duly intimated by the driver about the seizure of the bundles in transit. 8.. Admittedly, all the documents, i.e., bills, vouchers and transport receipts of the 1,100 bundles were in the name of M/s. Rakesh Trading Company, Kalsada (Alwar) and of the remaining 1,100 bundles were in the name of M/s. Sunderwal Match Industries Private Limited, Delhi. It is well-settled law that the apparent is the real state of affairs unless contrary is proved. Reference to Ram Kishan Das Munnu Lal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1961] 41 ITR 452 and Munneyya and Co. v. K. Varadarajulu AIR 1964 AP 17 may be made here. There is no provision in the Rajasthan Sal....