Jainendra Kumar Ranka, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -Department, under section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short "The Act") against the order dated May 15, 2004 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (in short, "The Board") in Appeal No. 881/2003, by which the appeal of the petitioner -Department had been rejected by affirming the order dated November 29, 2002 passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Bikaner, (in short, "the DC (A))", who had deleted the levy of penalty of Rs. 25,865 imposed by the learned Commercial Taxes Officer, Commercial Taxes Department, Check -Post, Shahjahanpur, District, Alwar, (in short, "the CTO"), under section 78(5) of the said Act. The brief facts of the case as emerging on the face of the record is that a penalty was imposed by the CTO under section 78(5) of the Act on the basis of checking of goods carried through a vehicle bearing No. RJ.19G -2736 conducted at Check -post, Shahjahanpur, District, Alwar, by the Commercial Taxes Officer by which plywood was being transported to Bikaner from Delhi. At the time of checking all relevant documents were produced including form No. ST -18A which was incomplete as it was not filled in properly. A notice was given to the respondent by the assessing officer that the goods were being carried with an intention to evade tax. In response to the notice, reply was filed by the respondent stating therein that the goods were fully tax paid and there was no occasion of tax evasion, it was further claimed that only some portion of form No. ST -18A was not filled in properly by the seller though on the part of purchaser he filled all the columns and the columns which were to be filled up by seller were found to be incomplete on account of the hasty action of the clerk of seller who handed it over to the driver of the vehicle as it is, therefore, the purchaser could not be penalised for the mistake of the seller. However, the assessing officer was not satisfied and imposed penalty of Rs. 25,865.
(2.) DISSATISFIED with the order of penalty, imposed by the assessing officer, i.e., CTO, the respondent, filed an appeal before the DC (A), who after going through the material on record, passed order dated November 29, 2002 and deleted the penalty imposed by the assessing officer by setting aside the order. Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the DC (A), the petitioner -Department, filed an appeal before the Tax Board, who after going through the orders passed by the CTO and the DC (A), and the material on record, rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner -Department sustained the deletion of the penalty imposed by the CTO and thus affirmed the order passed by the DC (A).
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the said order of the Tax Board, the petitioner -Department has now preferred the instant revision petition assailing the impugned order.;