Transit declaration penalty cannot stand when goods exited the State and endorsement defect was caused by check-post officials.

A penalty for transit declaration non-compliance was held unsustainable where goods moved through West Bengal under a transit declaration, were actually delivered outside the State, and the only defect was an incomplete check-post endorsement. The record showed passage through the Barovisa check-post, and the omission in the endorsement was attributable to check-post officials rather than the transporter. In the absence of any allegation that the goods were not taken out of West Bengal or were diverted, a mere procedural defect in endorsement could not justify penal action under the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 80(6) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was sustainable when the transit declaration showed an incomplete endorsement at the check-post, although the goods had actually crossed the border and were delivered at the destination.

Analysis: The goods were admittedly transported through West Bengal under a transit declaration and were delivered outside the State. The record showed that the check-post had made an endorsement indicating passage through Barovisa check-post, and the defect relied upon by the authorities was the absence of a complete endorsement on the body of the transit declaration. On the facts found, the omission was attributable to the check-post officials and not to the transporter. In such circumstances, a mere procedural deficiency in endorsement, without any allegation that the goods were not taken out of West Bengal or diverted, could not justify penal action.

Conclusion: The penalty was unsustainable and the order imposing it could not be upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty for transit declaration non-compliance cannot be sustained where the goods have in fact exited the State and the endorsement defect is due to the check-post authorities rather than any fault of the transporter.

---