https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158301 Penalty under section 29A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could be sustained only if the record showed a real and material basis to infer an attempt to evade tax. The purchase order indicated supply of goods to Cochin Shipyard Ltd. with delivery at its stores and charge of Central sales tax, supporting an inter-State sale rather than a taxable local transaction. Mere absence of registration under the State Act did not establish deliberate evasion. Even if the document had some features of a works contract, the State could not levy tax on transfer of property in goods occurring in the course of an inter-State sale. The penalty proceedings were therefore not sustainable. en-us Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2013 17:45:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158301 Penalty under section 29A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could be sustained only if the record showed a real and material basis to infer an attempt to evade tax. The purchase order indicated supply of goods to Cochin Shipyard Ltd. with delivery at its stores and charge of Central sales tax, supporting an inter-State sale rather than a taxable local transaction. Mere absence of registration under the State Act did not establish deliberate evasion. Even if the document had some features of a works contract, the State could not levy tax on transfer of property in goods occurring in the course of an inter-State sale. The penalty proceedings were therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158301