- (1.) The instant 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 June 18, 2004 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (in short, "the Board") in Appeal No. 94 of 2004, dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner-Department and upholding the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) (for short, "the DC(A)") whereby the DC(A) deleted the penalty amounting to Rs. 1,04,317 imposed under section 78(5) of the Act by setting aside the order passed by the learned assessing officer (in short, "the AO"). The said appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission of ST-18A declaration form filled in, in the ink, at the time of checking is mandatory under rule 53 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, read with section 78(2) of the RST Act, 1994 and whether incomplete submission of ST-18A declaration form attracts penalty on the price of the goods under section 78(4) of the RST Act, 1994? The brief facts of the case as emerging on the face of record is that on September 30, 1999, a vehicle No. MP-14B/9813 was checked at Badgaon, Kota by Flying Squad, Kota. The vehicle contained GR No. 16408 dated September 28, 1999, the consignor of the goods was Indian Seamless Steels and Alloys Ltd. Jijuri, Pune, whereas the respondent, namely, M/s. National Engineering Industries Ltd., Khatipura Road, Jaipur was the consignee. The goods, inter alia, contained 258 round bar weighing 14.062 tons with bill No. 5428 dated September 26, 1999, weighing 14.060 tons of a value of Rs. 3,47,721 along with these papers, declaration form ST-18A 10011/12 was also found in which it was found that the name and address of sender as well as the name and address of transporter were not stated and therefore according to the petitioner-Department, it was treated as incomplete. It has further been observed that as per notification dated March 26, 1999, in declaration from ST-18A, all columns should be completely filled in otherwise it can be reused. Accordingly, notice in the instant case was issued under section 78(2) of the said Act read with rule 53 of the Sales Tax Rules as to why the penalty under section 78(5) may not be levied on the respondent.
(2.) The counsel for the respondent appeared before the petitioner and stated along with reply reiterating the facts and further submitted that all necessary bills and vouchers were duly available with the driver, however on account of inadvertence only two columns remained to be filled in, as such these columns were immaterial. The respondent further pleaded that both the consignor as well as the consignee are reputed industries and will not indulge in such kind of activities particularly when all other columns were filled in and other relevant documents were found. However, the petitioner was not satisfied with the explanation so filed by the respondent observing that the declaration form ST-18A has its own sanctity and there were instances of re-using the same and since the respondent was not able to prove by acceptable evidence as to why the material columns could not be filled in, therefore by rejecting the explanation the penalty at 30 per cent amounting to Rs. 1,04,317 was levied on the total value as per the bills amounting to Rs. 3,47,721.
(3.) Dissatisfied with the imposition of the penalty so imposed, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). Detailed explanation was submitted by the respondent and it was pleaded that on account of clerical error, only two columns remained to be filled in and that when all other columns have been found to be in order, and bills have been found to be neither fabricated nor forged and such bills have been found to be genuine, therefore, merely because only two columns were not filled in, the penalty ought not to have been imposed. The DC(A) being satisfied with the explanation furnished by the respondent, deleted the penalty vide order dated August 16, 2003.;