STR 11/09 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R In S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No.11/2009 Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Flying Squad, Bhiwadi Vs. M/s. Ravi Shanker and another Date Of Order :: 27th March, 2009 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. J.M. Saxena, for petitioner. ........ This revision petition has been preferred by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Flying Squad, Bhiwadi against the order dated 6/7/2007 passed by Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer in Appeal No.3966/2005 whereby the order passed in appeal by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department, Bharatpur, dated 18/1/2005 was upheld by which the order of penalty under section 78(10-A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short the Act of 1994) passed by the assessing authority has been set aside. STR 11/09 (2) 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 29/1/2003, vehicle no.DL-1LD/6081 was checked and it was found that the vehicle carrying the goods from Bhiwadi to Delhi was not got checked at the check post and the assessing authority held liable for violation of the provisions of section 78(2)(b) of the Act of 1994 and after taking into consideration the reply imposed the penalty to the tune of Rs.21740/- under section 78(10-A) of the Act of 1994. 3. The respondent filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department, Bharatpur against the penalty order passed by the assessing authority which was allowed and the penalty order was set aside. 4. The revenue against the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) filed an appeal before the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer who in turn dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue and affirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department, Bharatpur. Hence, this revision. STR 11/09 (3) 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at the state of admission and perused the impugned judgments. 6. The only allegation has been levelled against the respondent that he did not get his documents checked in any check post, therefore, he has violated the provisions of section 78 (2-b) of the Act of 1994 but it is also admitted case of the revenue that on inspection, the driver was carrying all the necessary documents which makes out a clear case that the vehicle was carrying the goods along with the documents, therefore, it is difficult to presume that the driver willfully avoided the checking in any check post. Relying on the Division Bench judgment of this Court delivered in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Tajinder Pal (Tax Update Volume 6 Page 84), the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue and affirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner(Appeals), Bharatpur. I do not find any illegality or impropriety in the said orders. 7. Consequently, this revision petition along STR 11/09 (4) with stay application is dismissed at the stage. (J.R. Goyal),J. V.S. Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D60