TMI Blog1971 (3) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , are directed against the orders levying penalty under section 18-A of the Act. The assessee is a dealer manufacturing castings and is styled as Ganesh Foundry. It was assessed to tax for the period 1st April, 1963, to 31st March, 1964, by an assessment order made on 11th April, 1967, levying tax on its turnover at the rate of four per cent. The assessee which is a registered dealer had collect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods in question were liable to be taxed only at the rate of two per cent. Following the decision of the appellate authority, the Commercial Tax Officer by his order dated 10th January, 1970, assessed the petitioner's turnover for the year 1964-65 at two per cent. Since the petitioner had collected tax at the rate of four per cent., the assessing authority has levied penalty under section 18-A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders since they give no reasons for imposing the penalties. The second ground urged by Sri K. Srinivasan, in our opinion, is wellfounded. It is not obligatory to levy penalty under section 18-A of the Act wherever there is contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 18, however technical the contravention may be. The authority imposing penalty has to consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g powers under section 18 has to take into consideration before levying penalty. What is the amount of penalty that should be levied would also depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Without considering the circumstances under which the collection was made, the assessing authority could not have straightaway levied penalty under section 18-A equal to the excess amount collected by i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
