TMI Blog1986 (2) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the retrospective amendment of section 17(3) of the Act by the amending Act No. 13 of 1971? 2.. The short facts leading to this reference are as under: The applicantassessee, M/s. Bhilari Motors, Raipur, deal in automobiles, viz., trucks, tractors, etc. The applicant is a registered dealer under the Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act. 3.. For the period 1st January, 1970, to 31st December, 1970, the gross turnover was determined at Rs. 1,02,51,321 and as such the taxable turnover was Rs. 56,64,196. The department assessed the tax to the tune of Rs. 5,53,763. The due date of filing the return and the payment of tax was 30th May, 1970, whereas the return was submitted after 52 days, i.e., on 21st July, 1970, and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicant and held that the aforesaid ground cannot be a reason for condoning the delay in submitting the return and depositing the sales tax. The appellate authority while taking into consideration the delay in depositing of tax, calculated interest of the period for which the sales tax was withheld and not deposited on due date and as such interest at the rate of 15 per cent was calculated on the amount of the tax assessed, which was worked out at Rs. 5,82,000. In this way the penalty was enhanced to Rs. 60,000. 6.. The applicant-assessee, therefore, preferred second appeal before the Tribunal (Board of Revenue). The Board of Revenue, however, reduced the penalty from Rs. 60,000 to Rs. 40,000 against which, on application, the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he provisions of section 17(3) of the Act have been amended giving retrospective effect from the date of commencement of the Act authorising imposition of penalty for non-payment of tax along with the return. Therefore, not only section 17(3) of the Act was amended retrospectively but any action taken or penalty imposed, was validated under the Act, as amended. In view of this amendment it can no longer be said that section 17(3) of the Act did not authorise the imposition of penalty for non-deposit of tax before the return was filed. This view is fortified in Premier Refractories of India (Pvt.) Ltd., Katni v. Sales Tax Officer, Jabalpur 1973 MPLJ 946. Therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant-assessee has no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per cent of the tax for every month or part thereof during which the default continued, but not exceeding in aggregate 25 per cent of the tax which may be assessed under section 18 of the Act. The total assessed is Rs. 5,63,763 and, therefore, considering the period of default, under section 17(3)(ii) of the Act, the penalty, if worked out would come to more than one lakh rupees. We, therefore, fail to understand as to why the taxing authorities and the Tribunal have shown leniency by deviating the statutory provisions of section 17(3)(ii) of the Act and imposed only Rs. 40,000 by way of penalty. 13.. It is settled law that there is no equity about a tax and there is no presumption as to tax and nothing is to be read in, nothing is to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
