Penalty for minor transport-document discrepancies was unsustainable absent evidence of a non-genuine transaction or tax evasion intent.

Penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was found unsustainable where transport documents showed only minor discrepancies and the record otherwise supported a genuine transaction. The goods were accompanied by the sale bill and goods transit receipt, the declaration ST 17 was furnished, and the transaction was entered in the books of account. The demand draft reference on the bill further supported genuineness. The court treated the defects as minor lacunae, held that they did not establish irregularity in transit or intent to evade tax, and declined to sustain penalty on suspicion alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 was justified when the transport documents contained only minor discrepancies and there was no material to show a non-genuine transaction or intent to evade tax.

Analysis: The goods were accompanied by the required sale bill and goods transit receipt, and the transaction was recorded in the books of account. The declaration ST 17 was furnished, and the demand draft reference on the bill supported the genuineness of the transaction. The discrepancies noticed in the documents were treated as minor lacunae and did not, by themselves, establish any irregularity in transit or any intention to evade tax. Penalty could not be sustained merely on suspicion, and the concurrent findings of the appellate authorities were not shown to suffer from perversity or misdirection in law.

Conclusion: The penalty under section 78(5) was not justified, and the revision petition failed.

---