Technical breach in tax transport compliance cannot sustain penalty absent deliberate evasion or conscious disregard of law.

Penalty for transporting goods without Form 39 was unsustainable where the movement was pursuant to genuine sale transactions and no intention to evade tax was shown. Mere non-accompaniment of the form amounted only to a technical breach; in taxing penalty proceedings, the authority must prove deliberate defiance of law, contumacious conduct, dishonesty, or conscious disregard of statutory duty. As those elements were absent, the penalty was set aside and the revisional order restoring it was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed for transporting goods without Form 39 could be sustained where the transaction was genuine and no intention to evade tax was shown.

Analysis: The goods were found to have moved pursuant to genuine sale transactions and the genuineness of the movement was not seriously disputed. The only lapse was non-accompaniment by Form 39, which amounted at most to a technical violation. In penalty proceedings under taxing statutes, the authority must establish a guilty intention or conduct showing deliberate defiance of law, contumaciousness, dishonesty, or conscious disregard of statutory obligation. A penalty cannot be upheld merely because a statutory breach occurred.

Conclusion: The penalty was not sustainable and was set aside, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revisional order restoring the penalty was quashed and the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty under a taxing statute is not ordinarily imposable for a mere technical breach unless the assessee acted deliberately, contumaciously, dishonestly, or in conscious disregard of the statutory obligation.

---