1980 (2) TMI 230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ugust, 1979, suo motu revising the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore. Admittedly the appellant herein collected a sum of Rs. 18,374 by way of sales tax whereas the transactions were not liable to sales tax under the law. In view of this, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer took action against the appellant under section 22(2) of the Act and levied a penalty. The appellant pre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uch step. As a matter of fact, it would appear that the Board of Revenue expressly called upon the appellant whether he was prepared to refund the amount collected from the customers. Even then the appellant did not give a straight reply, but tried to put forward the contention that he had passed credit notes in favour of the customers to the extent of Rs. 9,200 and purported to produce the certif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not either expressly or by necessary implication make section 22 apply to the collection of surcharge. Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971, reads as follows: "Section 3. (2) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of the said Act shall apply in relation to the surcharge payable under subsection (1) as they apply in relation to the tax payable under the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X