9911796707
TMI Blog1961 (9) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elf registered under section 8-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. On 31st January, 1937, he made an application for the grant of an exemption certificate for relieving him from liability for payment of sales tax on his turnover of food-grains. It was accompanied by an exemption fee of Rs. 18 only. Upon inquiry, the Sales Tax Officer made an estimate of his turnover at Rs. 25.000, and held that he was li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his exemption certificate would be liable to be cancelled. The petitioner ignored this notice. In due course, by reason of the omission of the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs 132 or even to appear before the Sales Tax Officer, he, by order dated 15th December, 1958, determined the sales tax payable by the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 468-12-0, under rule 23. He, however, by the same order gav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the petitioner is that the sum of Rs. 37-8-0 was a penalty, and having regard to the provisions of section 15-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, penalty could not be levied without the prior sanction of the Commissioner, Sales Tax, and without notice to the petitioner. I see no force at all in this point. The provision for levy of exemption fee in lieu of sales tax is in the nature of a concession, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son or other not paid the exemption fee within the time within which it was required to be paid. This concession was conditional upon the payment of a certain amount by way of a compounding fee. To characterise this "compounding fee" as a "penalty" appears to me to be a misnomer. This compounding fee was by way of giving the defaulting dealer a locus penitentiae in the matter. If the dealer did no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied with the condition of deposit of the further amount. Not having done so, under the provisions of the rules, he became liable for payment of sales tax, which, as I have already pointed out, amounted to Rs. 468-75 nP. As the petitioner admittedly did not pay this amount, it was inevitable that recovery proceedings in respect of this amount should have followed upon the framing of the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
