Attempt to evade tax not proved where invoice and transport records supported the assessee's explanation for goods movement.

Under section 29A(4) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, action for detention or penalty required a foundational finding of an attempt to evade tax. On the facts, the goods were covered by invoice, part of the consignment had already been delivered at Ernakulam, and the balance was being transported to Coimbatore; the carrier's certificate, driver's statement, and accounting entries supported the assessee's explanation. The record therefore did not establish the statutory pre-condition for invoking section 29A(4), and the penalty and security proceedings were held unjustified.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts of the transport of goods, the statutory pre-condition for action under section 29A(4) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, namely an attempt to evade tax, was established.

Analysis: The material on record showed that the goods were covered by the invoice, that one part of the consignment had already been delivered at Ernakulam, and that the remaining goods were being carried onward to Coimbatore. The supporting certificate of the common carrier, the driver's statement, and the accounting entries were consistent with the assessee's explanation. On these facts, the record did not disclose the foundational satisfaction required by section 29A(4) for treating the movement as an attempt to evade tax.

Conclusion: The alleged attempt to evade tax was not proved, and the penalty and security proceedings were unjustified in favour of the assessee.

---