Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2011 (12) TMI 467

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... J.-The above petitions involve identical question for the adjudication by this court and are being disposed of by this common order. These petitions have been filed impugning the order dated January 22, 2009, passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, upholding the order dated July 28, 2007, passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur, setting aside the levy of penalty on the respondents....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t-assessee from its Alwar office to its own branch in Morena was vitiated/illegal and on this count alone penalty under section 76(6) of the Act of 2003 was levied. The matter was considered by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) in appeal, who taking into consideration the fact that all the requisite documents were in accompaniment of the goods in transit and that no inquiry was held to hold that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....intent to evade tax. It was further held by the Tax Board that no inquiry was held by the assessing authority to conclude that the documentation by the respondent-assessee was deliberately conceived with an intent to evade the tax and that the penalty had been levied on mere suspicion. I have considered the impugned order dated January 22, 2009 and am of the considered view that as the goods in t....