2014 (4) TMI 992

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 could not be imposed on the respondent-assessee, if no enquiry was made from the consignee firm on the basis that the respondent-assessee was not able to lead evidence as to the consignee being registered and its relevant certificate of identification, if other supporting bills, vouchers, documents found at the time of checking of the goods like sales book, transport etc. were found in order. 2. Counsel for petitioner submitted that the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Guljag Industries Vs. CTO, reported in (2007) 7 SCC 269: and Bajaj Electricals Limited, reported in (2009) 1 SCC 308 has decided the controversy in favour of the revenue-petitioner and accordingly this revision petition deserves to be ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on'ble Court stated "in the light of our judgment, we direct the Department to dispose of the cases in accordance with law enunciated by us. It also held that mensrea is not an essential ingredient for contravention of Section 78(2) of the RST Act, 1954 and breach of Section 78(2) would attract levy of penalty under Section 78(5) of the RST Act, 1954 in cases where goods in movement have travelled with an incomplete form. Accordingly, in my view, this is also a case where the matter needs to be remanded back to the Assessing Officer so as to provide an opportunity to the respondent-assessee to provide identification of the consignee which the respondent-assessee was unable to provide at the time of imposition of the penalty as the penalty w....