TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1218
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Sales Tax Revision Petition is directed against the order dt.31/05/1997 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board. 2. The brief facts which can be noticed on perusal the record are that the assesseerespondent is said to be driver as well as incharge of vehicle No.HYO-6757 and on 22/03/1991, the vehicle was intercepted by the Anti Evasion, Wing, Circle-II, Jaipur of the Revenue and on inspection, it was n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e driver on interrogation stated that the goods were to be delivered at Jaipur. However, since there was discrepancy in the documents as well as version of the driver of the respondent. The Assessing Officer noticed that goods were being sent with the intention of evasion of tax and penalty under section 22A(7) at Rs. 27,673/- was imposed. 3. Dissatisfied with the imposition of penalty, the matt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s consideration by this Court. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the revenue and in my view no interference is required in the order impugned as the Tax Board after appreciation of evidence on record and after noticing the facts, have deleted the penalty by well by a reasoned order. 6. Admittedly the vehicle was intercepted on 22/03/1991, the respondent filed its exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial Taxes Officer dt.07/06/1991 before imposing of the penalty or before passing of an order ought to have been provided to the assessee-respondent and thereafter appropriate order could have been passed. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner was that the matter may be restored for providing an opportunity now but in my view, it is too late to remand the matter since penalty was impose....