while producing the relevant bills and bilty of the goods being transported did not produce the prescribed format No. VAT 47, which was inter alia required to be produced along with other relevant documents as per Section 76(2) of RVAT Act. A notice was issued to the assessee on the same date and in reply to the notice, the form No. VAT 47 was also produced before the ACTO on the same date. However, the respondent imposed a penalty on the petitioner-assessee vide order dated 30.08.2012 under Section 76(6) of RVAT Act. The first appeal filed by the petitionerassessee came to be allowed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 07.08.2013. However, the same was assailed by the revenue and the learned Tax Board reversed the finding of the Appellate Authority and maintained the imposition of penalty vide order dated 23.01.2017. The petitioner-assessee thereafter applied for rectification of order dated 23.01.2017, but the said application was also dismissed vide order dated 25.08.2017. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-assessee contends that no penalty under Section 76(6) ought to be imposed since relevant documents in the forms of bills, performa invoice numbering 14; dated 29.08.2012 which duly reflected VAT 47 serial number 859274, and bilty accompanied the said goods and the defect of not furnishing the VAT 47 was also immediately cured on the very same day. Learned counsel for the petitionerassessee contends that the learned Tax Board has fallen into an error in holding that VAT 47 form which was not available on the spot, but produced shortly thereafter was a mere afterthought. Learned counsel submits that the form VAT 47 was produced shortly after the truck was checked and the performa invoice
