Expired ST-18A form alone did not justify penalty where no intent to evade tax was found.

Carrying an expired ST-18A declaration form with goods in transit did not, by itself, attract penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. The court applied the principle that expiry of the form at the time of interception does not make it non est, especially where the form was later renewed and the authorities found no mens rea to evade or avoid tax. On that basis, mere time-barred status of the declaration form when goods were checked was held insufficient to sustain penalty.

---

---

Issues: Whether carrying a time-barred declaration form ST-18A along with goods in transit, by itself, attracts penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 for violation of section 78(2)(a) of that Act.

Analysis: The declaration form was found expired at the time of checking, but it was subsequently renewed. The earlier decision relied upon held that on expiry, the form ST-18A does not become non est and may be validated for a further period by the competent officer. In that decision, penalty was not sustained where the authorities found absence of mens rea to evade or avoid tax. Applying that principle, the mere fact that the form was time-barred at the moment of interception did not automatically justify penalty under section 78(5).

Conclusion: The question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue; penalty was not attracted merely because the declaration form was time-barred when the goods were checked.

---