Transit document compliance cannot be cured later in penalty proceedings for goods in transit

Documents required to accompany goods in transit under section 28-A(2) could not be produced for the first time in penalty proceedings to avoid liability. The Karnataka High Court noted that the transporter had admittedly not carried the prescribed documents, and the cited precedent only recognised detention of the vehicle at the check-post when time to produce documents had been granted and the documents still were not produced. That limited principle did not extend to later production after proceedings had already begun. Accepting that contention would have undermined section 28-A(2), so the penalty was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether documents required to accompany goods in transit under section 28-A(2) could be produced later at the hearing so as to avoid penalty.

Analysis: The required documents were admittedly not carried by the transporter. The Court held that the cited precedent did not support the proposition that such documents could be produced subsequently in proceedings already initiated. The earlier observations only recognised the power of the check-post officer to detain the vehicle when the prescribed documents were not produced after time was granted. Granting time to produce documents at the check post was not the same as allowing later production in penalty proceedings. Accepting the petitioner's contention would render section 28-A(2) ineffective.

Conclusion: Subsequent production of the required documents did not exonerate the transporter, and the penalty was upheld against the assessee.

---