Trade tax penalty sustained when goods lacked supporting bill and account records were not produced for verification.

Penalty under the trade tax law was treated as sustainable where intercepted goods were supported only by doubtful challans, no bill was produced at inspection, and the dealer failed to furnish the relevant books of account or challan book for verification. Discrepancies in the challans, including registration and document particulars, together with the dealer's admitted printing mistakes and the later production of differing carbon copies, justified an inference that the goods had not been entered in the accounts. The Tribunal erred in treating the discrepancies as minor without examining the documents. The revision succeeded, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the matter was remanded only for reconsideration of penalty quantum.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty was justified where, at the time of inspection, the goods were supported only by challans found doubtful, and the dealer failed to produce the books of account and challan book for verification.

Analysis: The levy of penalty under the trade tax turned on whether the goods had been entered in the books of account when checked. At inspection, no bill was available and only challans were produced. The challans were doubted because of discrepancies in the registration number and challan particulars, and the dealer admitted printing mistakes. Despite being called upon, the dealer did not produce the challan book or books of account for verification before the inspecting authority or the assessing authority. The appellate authority had also found differences between the seized challans and the carbon copies later produced. In these circumstances, the inference that the goods were not entered in the books of account was held to be justified, and the Tribunal was found to have erred in treating the discrepancies as minor without examining the documents.

Conclusion: The penalty was held to be sustainable against the dealer.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the matter was sent back for reconsideration only on the quantum of penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are intercepted without a supporting bill and the dealer fails to produce the relevant books of account for verification, a justified inference may be drawn that the goods were not entered in the accounts, supporting penalty under the trade tax statute.

---