JHOOMARMAL DHANRAJ Vs. ACTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this revision petition, the petitioner -dealer seeks to question the order dated 28.03.2006 as passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer in Appeal No. 700/2005 whereby, while setting aside the order dated 24.02.2005 as passed by the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), Bikaner, the order dated 14.10.2003 as passed by the Assessing Authority under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 ('the Act of 1994') has been restored.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the background facts and relevant aspects of the matter are that on 11.10.2003 a truck bearing registration No. RJ 19 G 2026 coming from Nokha to Jodhpur was checked at Nagaur road by the empowered authorities under the Act of 1994 and upon demanding the documents, a bilti of M/s. Kamal Road Lines, Nokha dated 11.10.2003 and a bill issued by the petitioner -dealer bearing No. 39 dated 11.10.2003 and a letter to M/s. Shanti Pulses, Jodhpur for payment of transportation charges at Rs.1,690/ - were produced. The authorities concerned found that the bilti carried the particulars of '224 kattas and 19 bags ' of 'cattle feed ' whereas the particulars of the goods were stated in the bill as 'eqax nky Msest S.T.F. ¼iqà '' vkgkj 1/2 '. The authorities checked the vehicle and found it carrying damaged Moong and Urad; and observed that the goods in question were liable to tax as pulse but were wrongly sold as tax free goods in the name of 'cattle feed '. Hence, a notice under Section 78(4) (a) of the Act of 1994 was issued.

(3.) THE Assessing Authority in its impugned order dated 14.10.2003 referred to the facts of the case and, while relying upon various decisions including a Division Bench decision of This Court in the case of Gotilal Bhonrilal v. C.T.O., (1986) 63 STC 78 and that of Hon 'ble Bombay High Court in Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra held that the dealer had intentionally and with a view to evade tax shown the taxable goods as cattle feed under a false declaration and transported the goods as sales tax free. The Authority, therefore, imposed Rs.24,273/ - as penalty and further ordered recovery of Rs.3,236/ - towards sales tax.