Transport documents and route mismatch can justify a penalty where facts support a reasonable inference of tax evasion.

Penalty under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act for alleged attempt to evade tax was upheld where goods were intercepted without contemporaneous transport documents, and the papers produced later did not explain the actual route or destination. The authorities treated the later documents as an afterthought because they described movement from Jharkhand to Lucknow, while the vehicle was found at Allahabad, and the claimed diversion was unsupported by amended papers or the assessee's returns. On those facts, a reasonable inference of tax evasion arose, and the revisional court found no legal error in the concurrent factual findings sustaining the statutory penalty.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed under Section 54(1)(14) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 for alleged attempt to evade tax in respect of transported goods was justified.

Analysis: The vehicle carrying goods was intercepted without documents being produced at the time of detention, and the relevant papers were furnished only later. The documents produced by the assessee described movement of goods from Jharkhand to Lucknow, while the vehicle was found at Allahabad and the explanation for diversion to Allahabad was not supported by amended transport papers or by the assessee's returns. The fact-finding authorities recorded cogent reasons for treating the documents as an afterthought and for concluding that the circumstances gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of tax evasion. The revisional court found no legal error in the appreciation of these facts and accepted that the statutory penalty provision was attracted where the conduct and documents supported an inference of evasion.

Conclusion: The penalty was validly imposed and the challenge to the concurrent findings failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are intercepted without contemporaneous transport documents and the later-produced documents do not explain the actual route or destination, a reasonable inference of attempted tax evasion may sustain penalty under the VAT law.

---