https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157447 A transporter carrying goods without the prescribed documents, and later producing fictitious receipts, could be proceeded against under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. The Court noted that seizure in transit was justified where the declaration was false or the goods were not covered by prescribed documents, and that the transporter had sought compounding and accepted the statutory benefit. It further held that the compounding fee and tax fixed were within the limits authorised by sections 16(9)(b) and 22-A(7), and were neither without jurisdiction nor excessive. The writ petition therefore failed and the impugned action was upheld. en-us Mon, 10 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Oct 2013 16:13:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157447 A transporter carrying goods without the prescribed documents, and later producing fictitious receipts, could be proceeded against under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. The Court noted that seizure in transit was justified where the declaration was false or the goods were not covered by prescribed documents, and that the transporter had sought compounding and accepted the statutory benefit. It further held that the compounding fee and tax fixed were within the limits authorised by sections 16(9)(b) and 22-A(7), and were neither without jurisdiction nor excessive. The writ petition therefore failed and the impugned action was upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 10 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157447