Transit-check penalty cannot stand where required documents were present and no intent to evade tax was shown.

Penalty under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act transit-check provisions cannot be sustained merely because the check-post seal was absent if the goods were accompanied by the required documents at the time of checking. The court applied earlier authority treating the relevant provisions as directory, not mandatory, and noted that the appellate authorities had found all necessary documents were available, tax had already been paid, and no mens rea or intention to evade tax was shown. On those facts, the penalty was not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 78(2)(b) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 was leviable when the goods were accompanied by the necessary documents at the time of checking but the documents did not bear the check-post seal, and whether absence of mens rea negatived any inference of intention to evade tax.

Analysis: The revision was covered by earlier authority holding that the relevant provisions are directory and not mandatory. Where the requisite documents are available at the time of checking of the vehicle or goods, mere absence of the check-post seal does not by itself establish an intention to evade tax. The appellate authorities had concurrently found that all required documents were available, tax had already been paid, and no mens rea was shown on the part of the assessee.

Conclusion: Penalty was not warranted on the facts, and the challenge to the order setting aside the penalty failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty under the transit-check provisions cannot be sustained merely for want of a check-post seal when the required documents are present and there is no material to infer an intention to evade tax.

---