https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325192 Penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was upheld where goods were intercepted without genuine transport documents, the driver was found to have attempted to avoid the check post, and the explanation of loss of documents in transit was rejected. Concurrent factual findings showed the documents were produced only after detention and no account books were produced to displace the inference of attempted tax evasion. In appeal under section 68, no substantial question of law arose because the findings were not shown to be perverse, so the challenge failed. en-us Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 14:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325192 Penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was upheld where goods were intercepted without genuine transport documents, the driver was found to have attempted to avoid the check post, and the explanation of loss of documents in transit was rejected. Concurrent factual findings showed the documents were produced only after detention and no account books were produced to displace the inference of attempted tax evasion. In appeal under section 68, no substantial question of law arose because the findings were not shown to be perverse, so the challenge failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325192