https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444197 Penalty under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where goods in inter-State transport were accompanied by the invoice, G.R. and Form 38, and the only defect was an incorrect description in Form 38. The Court held that a mere presumption that the form might be misused or reused is insufficient; penal action requires evidence that the goods were without proper documents or that there was intent to evade tax. On those facts, the penalty was unjustified and the revisionist succeeded on the substantial question of law. en-us Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Oct 2023 16:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444197 Penalty under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where goods in inter-State transport were accompanied by the invoice, G.R. and Form 38, and the only defect was an incorrect description in Form 38. The Court held that a mere presumption that the form might be misused or reused is insufficient; penal action requires evidence that the goods were without proper documents or that there was intent to evade tax. On those facts, the penalty was unjustified and the revisionist succeeded on the substantial question of law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444197