Unreliable transport documents and concurrent factual findings justified advance tax and penalty, with writ interference refused.

Concurrent factual findings that transport documents were unreliable, including unexplained omission of papers and later-produced documents appearing procured after seizure, supported the levy of advance tax and penalty under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The writ court found no illegality in the authorities' inference that additional televisions were being moved without proper documentation and declined interference under Article 226. The tax demand and penalty were therefore sustained, and the challenge to the revisional order failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the levy of advance tax and penalty under Section 75(6) of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was justified on the facts found by the authorities.

Analysis: The authority below found that the vehicle was carrying additional televisions beyond the documents produced at the check post, that the explanation regarding omission of papers was unsupported by a genuine record, and that the later-produced document appeared unreliable. The finding that the same consignee had issued two delivery notes for the same consignor on the same date for movement in the same truck supported the inference that the documents for the additional goods were procured after seizure. The writ court found these concurrent factual findings well founded and saw no illegality warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The levy of advance tax and penalty was upheld and the challenge to the revisional order failed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed and the demand sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the authorities record concurrent findings on the unreliability of transport documents and an attempt to evade tax, interference in writ jurisdiction is unwarranted and the tax demand and penalty may be sustained.

---