9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (11) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1954 ( RST Act , for short) before the Rajasthan High Court stood transferred to this Tribunal with the coming into force of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995 and is directed against judgment dated March 7, 1990 in Appeal No. 178/85/Jaipur of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal (as the Rajasthan Tax Board was then known and hereinafter referred to as the Board ) allowing the appeal of the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n issued earlier. An attempt to evade tax was suspected to have been made. The non-petitioner was issued a notice on July 1, 1982 to show cause against the imposition of penalty by July 6, 1982. The non-petitioner is said to have made an application seeking finalisation of the matter there and then, whereupon a penalty of Rs. 8,500 was imposed under section 22A(7), RST Act. 3.. The D.C. (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able and whether a notice of 15 days was mandatory? 5.. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 6.. Section 22A(7), RST Act as it then stood covered the following modes of transportation, viz., by a vehicle, boat and animal. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Ninth Edition, gives the meaning of vehicle to be any conveyance for transporting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing determination of the matter the same day, particularly when there were uncontroverted allegations of duress. When the identity of the consignee was known it was necessary to have made enquiries from him too before imposing penalty. For these reasons the orders of the petitioner and the D.C. (Appeals) cannot stand and were correctly set aside. 8.. The application for revision stands disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
