S.B.CIVIL SALES TAX REVISION NO. 151/2009 (ACTO (F.S.) Sirohi vs. M/s Gokul Grah Udhyog, Beawar) DATE OF ORDER : 19/2/2010 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Lokesh Mathur for Mr.V.K.Mathur, for the petitioner Revenue Mr.Dinesh Mehta for the respondent Assessee. Heard learned counsels. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the controversy involved in this case is covered by the recent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CTO Vs. M/s Bajaj Electricals ltd. – 2009 (1) SCC 309 and, therefore, the learned Tax Board was not justified in setting aside the penalty under Section 78 (5) of the Act imposed on the respondent assessee only the ground that penalty was not imposable on the owner of the goods prior to amendment in Section 78(5) on 22/3/2002. In this regard the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court is very clear that penalty prior to amendment could be imposed on the owner of the goods, therefore, the view of learned Tax Board is apparently not sustainable and the matter deserves to be remanded back to the learned Tax Board for decision afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned order of the Tax Board dated 3/7/2008 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Tax Board for deciding the matter afresh as aforesaid. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. Item no. 37 baweja/-