Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
(2.) THE vehicle in dispute was checked by assessing officer and on production of documents by in -charge of the vehicle, it was found that seal of check post of Commercial Taxes Department of the State of Rajasthan was not there, therefore, assessing officer issued a notice under Section 76(11) of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2003') to impose penalty Assessee filed reply to show cause notice wherein he stated that all the relevant documents were available with the vehicle in - charge, therefore, there was no intention to evade tax. However, assessing officer was of the view that putting a seal on the documents is necessary, therefore, there is breach of Section 76(11) of the Act of 2003 and as such, penalty is leviable and consequently, he levied a penalty of Rs. 70,000/ - vide order dated 25.01.2008 and issued a demand notice. Said order was challenged by Assessee by way of appeal before Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), who vide order dated 15.04.2008 allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty order. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner(Appeals), Revenue preferred an appeal before Rajasthan Tax Board, but without success. Judgment dated 10.11.2009 passed by Rajasthan Tax Board is under challenge in this revision petition filed on behalf of the revenue.
(3.) SUBMISSION of learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that since seal of check post of Commercial Taxes Department was not available on the relevant documents at the time of checking of goods, therefore, it should have been presumed that vehicle was not stopped at check post and Assessee violated the provisions of Section 76(11) of the Act of 2003, assessing officer rightly imposed a penalty, which has wrongly been set aside by the Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) as well as Rajasthan Tax Board, therefore, both the orders passed by both the appellate authorities may be set aside.;