2013 (5) TMI 813

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y which the Tax Board, while rejecting the Revenue s appeal, upheld the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and thus both the appellate authorities below held that the penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 could not be imposed on the respondent-assessee, if the declaration form ST 18-A prescribed under rule 53 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules read with sect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be followed and accordingly this court in the cases of Commercial Taxes Officer v. Jain Tubes reported in [2011] 30 Tax Update 125, ACTO v. Hariom Company reported in [2011] 30 Tax Update 285 and so also the judgment of this court passed in the case of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer v. Madhusudan Soap Udyog [2014] 69 VST 81 (Raj) (SB Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 151 of 2011, decided on May .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X