Transit document defects and concurrent findings of tax evasion sustained penalty under the Punjab VAT regime

Penalty for transit of goods remained sustainable where the driver carried only an incomplete delivery challan and did not produce the prescribed goods receipt or other required particulars under the Punjab VAT regime. Concurrent factual findings that the documents were not proper and that the circumstances indicated an attempt to evade tax were found free from illegality or perversity. In the absence of any substantial question of law, appellate interference was not warranted and the penalty was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty imposed for interception of goods in transit was sustainable when the driver did not carry the documents required under section 51(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, and whether the findings of evasion of tax warranted interference in appeal.

Analysis: The goods vehicle was found to be carrying only an incomplete delivery challan, without a goods receipt or other prescribed particulars, and the destination and consignee details were not properly mentioned. The authorities below concurrently held that the documents were not genuine or proper within the meaning of section 51(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, and that the circumstances showed an attempt to evade tax. The Court found no illegality or perversity in those concurrent factual findings and noted that no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

Conclusion: The penalty under section 51(7)(b) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was upheld and the challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where prescribed transit documents are not duly carried with goods in movement and the fact-finding authorities concurrently conclude an attempt to evade tax, the appellate court will not interfere absent perversity or a substantial question of law.

---