TMI Blog1961 (7) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is liability on the part of these petitioners to pay over to the Government all amounts collected by them, if they are in excess of the tax, if any, paid by them. 3.. As we mentioned at the beginning of this judgment in the main, the State relies upon the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125. 4.. Mr. P. Govindan Nair, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners in O.P. 866/58 and O.P. 1230/59 and Mr. C.K. Viswanatha Iyer, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in O.P. 774/59 urged that the liability, if any, arising under sub-section (2) must be limited only to any tax that the assessees may have lawfully and legally collected from the various parties which alone they wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period during which collections were made, and in default of such payment, the amounts may be recovered as if they were arrears of land revenue." A reading of the said section clearly shows that sub-section (1) consists of two parts, namely, (a) a person who is not a registered dealer in respect of whom there is a prohibition against collecting tax under the Act; and (b) a registered dealer in respect of whom there is also a prohibition against collecting tax except in accordance with the conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed. 5.. The proviso to sub-section (1) enables the Government to exempt persons who are not registered dealers from the provisions of sub-section (1) until such date as may be prescribed. The proviso clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Government Pleader and, in our view, sub-section (2), as pointed out earlier, can relate only to a person who is exempted under the proviso until the date that may be prescribed and that proviso in turn, has relation only to the nonregistered dealer dealt with in the first part of sub-section (1). 8.. In this connection, it should not be missed that we have to interpret a fiscal statute and in that context the observations of Shah, J., in C.A. Abraham v. Income-tax Officer [1961] 41 I.T.R. 425; A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 609 at p. 612.to the following effect have to be borne in mind: "In interpreting a fiscal statute, the court cannot proceed to make good deficiencies, if there be any, the court must interpret the statute as it stands, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section (1) has been prescribed in these matters. It is rather unfortunate that the respective officers, who have passed the various orders which are under attack in these proceedings have missed this very crucial and important point. Even accepting the contentions of the learned Government Pleader that sub-section (2) will apply to all persons both registered and non-registered dealers, unless a date has been prescribed under the proviso to sub-section (1) which alone will be again a date prescribed under sub-section (2), there is no jurisdiction on the part of the revenue to take action on the basis of sub-section (2). In view of the statement made by the learned Government Pleader, it follows that the State or its officers have no jurisd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
