Consignment transaction, not sale, defeats penalty where transport records and unrebutted affidavit support commission-based dispatch.

Transfer of tea goods from Ahmedabad to Pilibhanga was treated as a consignment transaction, not a sale under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, because the transport receipts, pro forma invoices, and unrebutted affidavit indicated dispatch on commission basis. The absence of a regular invoice or cash memo was consistent with consignment, and the record did not prove an outright sale by the Ahmedabad firms to the petitioner. As the sale finding formed the basis of the penalty, the penalty under section 22A(7) was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the transfer of 140 bags of tea from Ahmedabad to Pilibhanga was a sale within the meaning of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, or a consignment transaction between principal and commission agent, and whether the penalty imposed under section 22A(7) was sustainable.

Analysis: The goods were accompanied by transport receipts and pro forma invoices. The partner's affidavit stated that the goods had been despatched for sale on commission, and that affidavit was neither cross-examined nor rebutted. The invoices contained the relevant consignment particulars and registration numbers, and the mere use of pro forma invoices did not establish an outright sale. The absence of a regular invoice or cash memo was consistent with a consignment arrangement, and the material on record did not support the conclusion that the goods had been sold by the Ahmedabad firms to the petitioner. Since the finding of sale was the foundation of the penalty, the penalty could not stand.

Conclusion: The transfer was not proved to be a sale; it was a consignment transaction. The penalty under section 22A(7) was unsustainable and the revision succeeded.

---