TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (12) TMI 467
X X X X Extracts X X X X
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
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
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....