Penalty for defective declaration papers fails when goods are verifiable from accompanying documents and no tax evasion intent is shown

Penalty for omission in Form 38 was stated to be unsustainable where the goods were accompanied by import documents, bill, challan and allied papers, and the record showed only a clerical or human error in Column 8. The materials did not indicate that the goods differed from the declaration or that there was any deliberate suppression of turnover or attempt to evade tax. The note states that a procedural lapse alone is insufficient for penalty when the movement of goods can be verified from the accompanying documents, and the revision was allowed with the penalty set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty could be sustained for omission to fill a column in Form 38 when the goods were accompanied by the requisite documents and there was no material indicating intent to evade tax.

Analysis: The import documents, bill, challan and allied papers were available at the time of inspection, and the omission in Column 8 of Form 38 was found to be a clerical or human error. The materials on record did not show that the goods were different from those disclosed in the declaration or that there was any deliberate attempt to suppress turnover or evade tax. A procedural lapse, by itself, was held insufficient to justify penalty where the movement of goods could be verified from the accompanying documents.

Conclusion: The penalty was not sustainable, and the assessee succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The revision was allowed and the Tribunal's order upholding the penalty was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty for defective declaration papers cannot be imposed where the goods are verifiable from accompanying documents and no intention to evade tax is established.

---