9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (11) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of his jurisdiction in collecting Rs. 3,000 as if there is an evasion of tax under section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called the Act) and for failure to maintain correct and complete accounts required under section 25 of the Act; and that he could have proceeded against the petitioner only under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 32 of the Act and that in this case the Special Commercial Tax Officer has not only acted under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 32 but also purported to act under clause (a) without realising the fact that there was neither failure to pay, nor evasion of, any tax recoverable under the Act. It would appear that the Special Commercial Tax Officer inspected the prem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not be launched under section 31 of the Act, they have expressed in writing admitting the offence and offered to get the offence compounded in a sum of Rs. 1,000 (paid in Ch. No. 177 D/6-12-1965). I find them guilty and by accepting the offer of Rs. 1,000 as compounding fees and Rs. 3,000 as tax, I hereby compound the offence under section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957." Section 32 of the Act, it is necessary to point out, does not empower the Special Commercial Tax Officer to collect tax as has been done in this case. Section 32 is in two parts and provides for composition of offences. The prescribed authority is empowered to accept by way of composition under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 32 where th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r acted within the limits of his jurisdiction in collecting a sum of Rs. 1,000 by way of composition for the offence committed by the petitioner, the impugned order to that extent is held valid. As regards the collection of Rs. 3,000 as already held by us, it is done without jurisdiction, as that amount could not have been collected invoking clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 32 of the Act. Therefore, the order to the extent it relates to the collection of Rs. 3,000, as if it were a tax, is quashed and the Special Commercial Tax Officer is directed to refund that amount to the petitioner. This petition is allowed in part to the extent indicated above, but in the circumstances we make no order as to costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 200. Peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
