STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MALJI CHOGALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application has been presented on behalf of the State against order dated 19. 11. 63 passed by the Dy. Commissioner (Appeal) Jaipur. The facts of the case are that the Assistant Sales Tax Officer imposed a penalty under sec. 16 (l) (g) of Rs. 50/- for non-submission of declaration in respect of purchase of 50 bags of dhania. The assessee firm went in appeal before the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) who accepted the appeal and set aside the penalty of Rs. 50/-imposed by the A. S. T. O. Aggrieved by this order the State have come in revision.

(2.) I have heard counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The learned counsel for the State contended that the assessee had given a declaration that the goods were to be resold in Rajasthan and actually these were sent outside Rajasthan and the penalty under sec. 16 (l) (g) was rightly imposed by the Assessing Authority. He further contended that the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) did not examine whether the present case is covered by the rule laid down in Tulsiram Pannalal vs. State. The assessee had quoted Registration Certificate number to escape from the liability of tax and thus had wilfully acted in contravention of the rules. In support of his contention he cited S. T. C. 1966 p. 235.