https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257196 Goods intercepted with two sets of documents led the authorities to treat the movement as not a genuine sale in transit under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The detention under section 31(6) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was supported by recorded reasons to suspect absence of proper documents and possible tax evasion, and the enquiry, driver's statement and inspection report were treated as corroborative. The High Court accepted the concurrent factual findings, held that no substantial question of law arose, and upheld the detention, tax and penalty. en-us Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Mar 2015 05:57:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257196 Goods intercepted with two sets of documents led the authorities to treat the movement as not a genuine sale in transit under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The detention under section 31(6) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was supported by recorded reasons to suspect absence of proper documents and possible tax evasion, and the enquiry, driver's statement and inspection report were treated as corroborative. The High Court accepted the concurrent factual findings, held that no substantial question of law arose, and upheld the detention, tax and penalty. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257196