V. K. SINGHAL, J. - (1.)THE Commercial Taxes Officer, Check-post, Shahjahanpur, Alwar, has filed this revision under section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, against the order dated March 4, 1992 on November 26, 1992. THE following question of law has been raised which arises out of the order dated March 4, 1992 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal : " Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the penalty levied under section 22a of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act. "
(2.)THE brief facts of the case are that two air-conditioners were imported by the assessee vide bill No. 308 dated February 19, 1987. Along with bill and bilty form ST-18 was not submitted at the check-post. A penalty of Rs. 3,850 was levied estimating the value of the goods at Rs. 27,500. THE goods were intercepted at the check-post and the Manager expressed his inability to produce the declaration form ST-18. THE Sales Tax Tribunal proceeded on the basis that rule 62a has been declared, ultra vires in the case of Miss Alka Agarwal v. State of Rajasthan reported in [1987] 66 STC 204 (Raj); (1987) 1 RTJS 201 and set aside the levy of penalty vide its order dated April 26, 1988.
An application for rectification was moved against this order by the assessing authority before the Sales Tax Tribunal which was dismissed on February 28, 1990. Another application was moved for rectification of the order wherein the rectification application was accepted and the judgment of the Tribunal dated April 25, 1988, was recalled. The arguments of both the learned counsel were heard afresh by the Tribunal and, in view of the fact that the provisions of rule 62a were declared ultra vires by the single Bench, which judgment was subsequently set aside and certain amendments were made in the Rules, the Tribunal observed that the assessee has sufficient cause, not to submit declaration form and the penalty was set aside.

The question whether there was a sufficient cause or not, is a question of fact and the Tribunal being satisfied that there were sufficient reasons for not submitting the declaration form inviting the penal consequences is not a matter where the revisional jurisdiction could be exercised by this Court. The order passed by the Tribunal does not require any interference. The revision has no force and is dismissed. Petition dismissed. .