S.B.CIVIL SALES TAX REVISION NO.271/2006 (ACTO VS. M/s Hitteshi Traders) DATE OF ORDER : 12/1/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Vinit Mathur with Mr.Rishabh Sancheti, for the petitioner. Mr.S.L.Jain, for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner Revenue submits that the controversy involved in the present case is covered by the recent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ACTO Vs. Bajaj Electricals – 2008 (18) VST 436 (SC), whereby, penalty under Section 78(5) of the Act could be imposed if declaration in ST 18 form was found to be blank or incomplete as it is a penalty for civil liability on account of non-compliance of complete form being accompanied with the goods when checked during transit. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed and the impugned order of Tax Board dated 2/9/2004 is set aside and matter is remanded back to the Tax Board for consideration afresh of the case in light of the Supreme Court decision. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.36 baweja/-