Penalty for alleged goods mismatch fails where authorities produced no material to disprove tractor-part description.

Penalty for alleged mismatch between transport documents and goods was not warranted where the Tribunal found that pressure horns were used in tractors and no enquiry or expert opinion was obtained to disprove that description. The High Court noted that no material was produced in revision to show the finding was perverse or contrary to the record, so the factual basis for treating the goods as different was not established. The order setting aside the penalty was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty was liable to be levied for alleged mismatch between the goods declared in the transport documents and the pressure horns found on inspection.

Analysis: The dispute turned on whether the pressure horns carried in the vehicle could be treated as tractor parts and whether the departmental authorities had any material to negate that description. The Tribunal had recorded a factual finding that pressure horns were used in tractors and that no enquiry or expert opinion was obtained before treating them as different goods. In revision, no material was produced to show that this finding was perverse or contrary to the record.

Conclusion: Penalty was not justified and the Tribunal's order setting aside the penalty was sustained.

---