1 S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 100/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR JUDGMENT S. B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 100/2009 Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Jhalawar Versus M/s. Rajasthan Tubes Manufacturing Limited & Another. Date of Judgment: 08.11.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Mr. A. Kaushik on behalf of Mr. R.B. Mathur, for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly and frankly submitted that although judgment of Rajasthan Tax Board is contrary to the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Bajaj Electricals reported in (2009) 1 SCC 308, but since the required declaration form was filed alongwith reply to show cause notice by assessee before Commercial Taxes Officer, therefore, the present revision petition is liable to be dismissed in view of judgment delivered by Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Rajasthan and Another Vs. D.P. Metals, reported in (2002) 1 SCC 279. 2. I have examined the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and find that 2 S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 100/2009 he is right in saying so. It appears that the declaration from was not accompanied with the vehicle at the time of its checking, but the same was filed alongwith the reply to show cause notice before assessing authority. However, a penalty under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1994') was levied on the ground that declaration form should have been accompanied with the vehicle. Learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) instead of considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in State of Rajasthan and Another Vs. D.P. Metals(supra), set aside the penalty order on the ground that the case relates to period prior to 22.03.2002, therefore, assessment order could not have been passed against owner of the vehicle and it should have been passed against in-charge of the vehicle. Thereafter an appeal filed by Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer was dismissed by Rajasthan Tax Board vide judgment dated 06.09.2007, which is impugned in this revision petition. 3. From the orders passed by Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) and Rajasthan Tax Board, it is clear that Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) and Rajasthan Tax Board both committed illegality in setting aside the 3 S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 100/2009 order of assessment in view of above referred judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the case of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Bajaj Electricals Limited(supra), but in view of the fact that declaration form had already been submitted alongwith reply to show cause notice, therefore, there was sufficient compliance of the provisions of the Act of 1994 in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the case of State of Rajasthan and Another Vs. D.P. Metals(supra). In these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner is right in saying that impugned judgment passed by Rajasthan Tax Board and order passed by Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) are liable to be set aside, but assessment order is also liable to be set aside on the ground as discussed above and not on the ground as mentioned by Deputy Commissioner(Appeals) and Tax Board. 4. Consequently, I do not find any merit in this revision petition in view of above discussions and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain),J. Manoj, Item No.17.