TMI Blog1966 (10) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals), by his order of 6th April, 1956, held that the petitioner was not liable to sales tax on sales conducted outside Uttar Pradesh where the goods were despatched under railway receipts or on consignment basis. He directed that the petitioner be given credit for the amount already deposited on the sales. Accordingly, the petitioner claims a sum of Rs. 37,318-11-6 became refundable to the petitioner. In the appeal for the assessment year 1948-49 the Judge (Appeals) by his order of 10th May, 1956, similarly held that sales tax was not leviable on sales conducted outside Uttar Pradesh. But while setting aside the assessment in respect of the sales under which goods were sent outside Uttar Pradesh on consignment basis he remanded the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le to it in respect of the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50 should be adjusted against the tax liability for the assessment years 1956-57 and 1957-58. That request was rejected by the Sales Tax Officer. On 28th October, 1965, the Sales Tax Officer issued two certificates of recovery under section 8 to the Collector directing him to recover the tax in respect of the assessment years 1956-57 and 1957-58 respectively. Pursuant to the certificates the Collector commenced proceedings for recovery of the amount as arrears of land revenue. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner prays that the certificates of recovery and the consequent recovery proceedings be quashed. Mr. Jagdish Sarup for the petitioner has ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontemplated by section 8(1) when it speaks of the dealer being "in default of such payment ". The provision does not contemplate a set-off of cross debts. On the contrary, it contemplates actual payment of the amount mentioned in the notice of demand. If that amount is not paid, the dealer is in default. Moreover, my attention has not been drawn to any provision in the U.P. Sales Tax Act, or the Rules made thereunder, entitling a dealer to an adjustment as of right of his tax liability against refunds due to him. The two, the tax liability and the refunds, have been kept apart and there is nothing in the Act or the Rules to bridge the distance between them. In my opinion, it is not possible to say that because an amount is due to a dealer b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of final payment of the dues should also be recovered as arrears of land revenue, in terms of section 8(1-A). The imposition of penal interest has been effected by the Sales Tax Officer and not by the Collector. All that has been left to the Collector is the arithmetical computation of the actual amount to be recovered by way of interest. That, in my opinion, had necessarily to be left to the Collector because the Sales Tax Officer, when he issued the recovery certificates, would not be in a position to anticipate the date when the dues would be paid and consequently the amount of interest leviable thereon. This contention, therefore, must also fail. The petition is dismissed with costs. Petition dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
