1 Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. M/s. Dilip Enterprises. S.B.CIVIL (SALES TAX) REVISION PETITION NO.122/10 Dated:- 26.7.10. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. Lokesh Mathur, for the petitioner. 1. This revision petition is directed against order dated 11.11.09 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer in Appeal No.1667/08/Hanumangarh, whereby order dated 29.3.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Bikaner, (“the DC (Appeals”) deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Authority under Section 76 (6) of the Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (In short “the Act”) vide order dated 8.4.2007, has been affirmed. 2. A perusal of the orders impugned reveal that the DC (Appeals) and the Tax Board have concurrently found that the goods in transit were accompanied by all the requisite documents as prescribed under Section 76 (2) of the Act and the VAT was duly collected. The Tax Board has found that before passing the penalty order, the Assessing Authority was under an obligation to give at least seven days notice to the respondent dealer, however, the penalty proceedings were concluded by the Assessing Authority on the same day. Moreover, the penalty is 2 imposed on the basis of shortage of the stock at the business premises of dealer which cannot be a subject matter of inquiry in proceedings under Section 76 (6) of the Act. 3. In considered opinion of this Court, the concurrent finding arrived at by the Appellate authorities as aforesaid does not give rise to any question of law requiring consideration by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 84 of the Act. 4. In this view of the matter, the revision petition is dismissed. (SANGEET LODHA),J. rp/-