State Of Rajasthan & Anr vs M/S D.P. Metals on 4 October, 2001
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the assessee
contended that admittedly the railways except issuing
railway receipt, does not take any document or
declaration form at the time when the goods are taken
for transportation and sent on consignment and even the
AO has mentioned this fact after verifying from the
railway authorities. Learned counsel further contended
4
that VAT declaration form duly filled-in was submitted
on a show-cause notice and the judgment of apex court
in the case of State of Rajasthan & Another v. D.P.
Metals (2002) 1 SCC 279, squarely applies in the facts
of the instant case. Leaned counsel further contended
that the AO did not make further inquiry and had no
basis for imposition of penalty. Learned counsel
further contended that admittedly the name of consignee
finds place on the back side of the railway receipt and
the AO came to know about the assessee only after
noticing the name mentioned in the railway receipt,
otherwise the AO could not have even located the
respondent assessee. Learned counsel further contended
that the AO has nowhere held the said transaction to be
bogus or non genuine and only on account of doubts and
conjunctures is no reason for imposing the penalty.