TMI Blog1960 (1) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 16(4) of the Act. In an appeal against that order, the Assistant Collector of Sales Tax held that the penalty could not be levied on the ground on which the Sales Tax Officer had proceeded to do so, but he levied a penalty of Rs. 157-88 nP. for late payment and non-payment of tax due by the assessee. The firm thereupon preferred revision applications to the Sales Tax Tribunal, and the Sales Tax Tribunal affirmed the view taken by the Assistant Collector of Sales Tax. It is against that order of the Tribunal that the petitioner has come to this Court on this petition. The brief contention of the petitioner is that there is no provision in the Act nor is there any provision in the rules made under the Act which empowers the taxing authorities to levy penalty for non-payment or late payment of a tax after assessment. There is no dispute about the facts and it is common ground that there was a notice served on the petitioner to pay the amount of tax as required by sub-section (5) of section 16 and the relevant rules. There is no dispute either that the petitioner failed to pay the amount of tax mentioned in that notice on the date specified in it. But the case of the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r under that sub-section. That also is not disputable and has not been disputed. Then it is said that there is no time prescribed for the payment of the tax after an order of assessment under sections 13 and 14 has been made and there being no rule prescribing the time for payment of the amount of assessment, the only remedy of the Sales Tax Authorities is to enforce the order by adopting recovery proceedings. The greatest stress is laid on the expression "prescribed time" in sub-section (4) and it is urged that the expression "prescribed" has been defined in section 2(10) and must mean prescribed by rules framed under the Act. Sub-section 2(10) defines the expression "prescribed" to mean "prescribed by rules". In support of the argument, our attention has been drawn by Mr. S.P. Mehta to rules 10 and 21 of the Sales Tax Rules, 1954, and it is said that there is nothing in any of those rules which can be said to prescribe time for the payment of the amount of tax ascertained under sections 13 and 14 of the Act. We shall presently turn to the relevant rules and examine this argument. It is also said that sub-section (4) of section 16 deals with penalty and being a provision of a pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence is done to the language used. Bearing in mind these few observations which we have made, let us see what meaning requires to be placed on the expression "prescribed time" in sub-section (4) of section 16. The whole argument of Mr. S.P. Mehta rests upon an insistance that it is the definition clause and the definition clause alone which can be looked at by us for the purpose of interpreting the expression "prescribed time". Nothing save that definition, says Mr. Mehta, can be considered by us in interpreting the expression, and the argument has proceeded that the only thing that we have to do in interpreting this expression "prescribed time" is to see whether there is any rule which can be said to have prescribed the time for payment of the tax assessed under sections 13 and 14. On the other hand, Mr. R.J. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent, has urged that a definition clause cannot control the meaning of the defined expression in every provision of the enactment and he has relied on the initial words which are similar to those one finds in every definition clause in modern enactments. It is needless to stress that a definition clause cannot be permitted to control the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribed time need not be any invariable time or any fixed period of time. What is required is that there must be some measure and some manner of prescribing time adopted by the Legislature itself or by the rules. It is in the light of these observations that we turn to examine the language of sub-section (5) which, in our judgment, contains the material words. The material words are: "The amount of tax.......shall be paid by the dealer.......by such date as may be specified in a notice issued by the Collector for this purpose and the date to be so specified shall be not less than thirty days from the date of service of such notice." And the crucial words are "the date to be so specified shall be not less than thirty days from the date of service of such notice." As to these words, the only suggestion of Mr. S.P. Mehta is that merely stating that the date to be so specified shall be not less than thirty days from the date of service of the notice should not be regarded as laying down a prescription as to time. We are unable to accede to that suggestion. In our opinion, the words are in express terms and intended to lay down specifically that the time for payment shall not be anythin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which requires that the period that should be allowed to the assessee to pay the tax should not be a period of less than thirty days from the date of service of the notice. Having laid down that prescription, the legislature had necessarily to leave the matter to the Collector for the purpose of enabling him to mention a date by which the amount of the tax should be paid by the assessee and default of payment by which time would invite the operation of the penalty clause. On that reading of the relevant part of sub-section (5), we do not think it can be said that the meaning which we attribute to sub-section (5) requires the equation of the expression "specified" with the expression "prescribed". Sub-section (4) lays down inter alia the quantum of the penalty to be imposed in a case where the tax is not paid by any dealer within the prescribed time. Sub-section (5) in the main prescribes the time for the payment of the amount of tax. As we have already mentioned, we must read the expression "prescribed time" in its proper context, and when the meaning is to be gathered from such intrinsic evidence, there is all the more reason that we should give the fullest effect to the latter p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o so. There was some amendment in para. 2 of Form XVII, and we are concerned with the form as it existed prior to 31st March, 1956. The notice served upon the assessee in the instant case was as under: "You are hereby directed to pay the sum of Rs. 986-12-0 (as shown in the table below) into the Government Treasury..........and to produce the receipt..........for every month during which the amount remains unpaid after 15th April, 1956, and the said sum of Rs. 986-12-0 together with the penalty as specified above will be recoverable from you as an arrear of land revenue ". The notice, it is clear, specifies a date, which was not less than thirty days from the date of service of the notice, that date being 15th April, 1956, and there is no dispute that the notice was in effect served on the assessee-petitioner more than thirty days before 15th April, 1956. Reading rule 21 along with the requirements of sub-section (5) of section 16, as indeed we must do, to which it expressly refers and with the content of the notice in Form XVII it is not possible to accede to the contention that rule 21 does not prescribe any time for the payment of the amount of the tax. It is not necessary t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
