https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164292 Penalty for mismatch between goods loaded and goods covered by the challan was sustained because the explanation of human error was rejected on concurrent factual findings; the surrounding circumstances, including the driver's conduct and release of goods on security without protest, supported the inference that the discrepancy was real and no perversity was shown. However, the penalty quantified at 150 per cent of the tax was held excessive in the circumstances, as the dealer was bona fide and had no adverse past record, so the amount was reduced to the tax liability. en-us Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:08:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164292 Penalty for mismatch between goods loaded and goods covered by the challan was sustained because the explanation of human error was rejected on concurrent factual findings; the surrounding circumstances, including the driver's conduct and release of goods on security without protest, supported the inference that the discrepancy was real and no perversity was shown. However, the penalty quantified at 150 per cent of the tax was held excessive in the circumstances, as the dealer was bona fide and had no adverse past record, so the amount was reduced to the tax liability. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164292