Transit penalty upheld for invoice mismatch in SUVIDHA form; later papers failed to prove genuine transport.

Penalty for detention of goods in transit under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was upheld where the invoice number in the SUVIDHA form did not match the invoice produced and the supporting papers were generated only after detention. The statutory scheme under Section 60(4)(b) read with Section 56(4)(b) permits seizure and penalty if the person in charge cannot satisfy the authority about proper accounting of the goods. The article also notes that contravention of transit requirements attracts civil liability, and absence of mens rea does not by itself defeat penalty where the circumstances suggest a possible attempt to evade tax.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed for detention of goods in transit, on the basis of a mismatch in the invoice number accompanying the SUVIDHA form, was justified under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

Analysis: The goods were found in transit with supporting documents, but the invoice number in the SUVIDHA form did not match the invoice produced. The later-generated invoice and supporting papers did not satisfactorily establish the genuineness of the transport, particularly when they were generated after detention. The statutory scheme under Section 60(4)(b) read with Section 56(4)(b) permits seizure and penalty where the person in charge fails to satisfy the authority about proper accounting of the goods. The decision also applied the principle that penalty for contravention of transit requirements is a civil liability, and absence of mens rea does not by itself defeat the levy where the circumstances indicate a possible attempt to evade tax.

Conclusion: The penalty was upheld and the challenge failed.

---