2015 (3) TMI 1203 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Though admittedly form No. ST-18A was totally found to be blank and there appears to be discrepancies on the part of the respondent-assessee nevertheless the fact remains that the goods were transported and checked on 24/08/1996 and admittedly on the said date i.e. prior to 30/03/2000 there was no requirement of carrying Form ST-18A as per notification No./F.4(1)FD/Tax/Div/2000-314 dated 30.3.2000 in a case where there was branch transfer or transfer of stock from Head Office to the branch therefore though there is no finding by the two authorities about this issue and the Tax Board has decided the issue on merit but admittedly it is stock transfer therefore the penalty is not leviable though for different reasons.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to penalty imposition under section 78(5) of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act based on blank ST-18A form found during transportation of goods.

Analysis:
The case involved a Sales Tax Revision Petition filed by the Revenue against an order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board dismissing their appeal. The respondent-assessee, a manufacturer of air conditioners and water coolers, had goods transported from Bhiwandi to Jaipur and Udaipur. During an inspection, it was discovered that Form ST-18A was blank, leading to the detention of the vehicle and imposition of a penalty under section 78(5) of Rs. 1,74,557. The penalty was partly sustained by the Dy Commissioner (Appeals), but the Tax Board, Ajmer, set it aside, citing that all necessary documents were in order, and there was no evasion of tax.

The petitioner argued that the blank ST-18A form was crucial, citing a previous case where carrying an incomplete form led to a penalty. However, the court noted that there was no requirement to carry Form ST-18A before March 30, 2000, for branch transfers or stock transfers. Even though the form was blank, the penalty was deemed not leviable due to the notification issued by the Government of Rajasthan on March 30, 2000. The court referenced a previous case to support this decision, emphasizing that the penalty imposition was not applicable in the circumstances of the present case.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the revision petition, stating that no question of law arose, as the issue had been previously addressed in a similar case involving Indian Oil Corporation. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering relevant notifications and legal provisions when determining the applicability of penalties in cases of incomplete forms during the transportation of goods.