TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and pumps, filter points, gate valves, G. I.Fittings Check valves socks and other water supply materials for which the petitioner has issued 'C' form in respect of the inter-state purchase; that even though the petitioner requested the assessing authority as early as on 26.9.1989 to include G.I.fittings, hand pumps, filter points gate valves etc., the first respondent came to the conclusion that the petitioner had misused the 'C' form and levied penalty under Section 10(A) of the CST Act, against which the petitioner filed an appeal as a result of which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Thanjavur set aside the penalty with an observation that the appellant was under bona fide belief in his representation, as the impugned goods had been subjected to tax for all these years by the assessing officer without any interference and hence the representation should not be considered to be false to the knowledge of the appellant and hence the provision under Section 10(b) of the CST Act could not be attracted and levied minimum penalty and disposed of all the appeals. 3. In view of that order, the Joint Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Chennai issued a suo motu revision under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the authority below has rendered that the penalty levied in respect of cases under the CST Act for misuse of 'C' form would normally be assessed at consistently read and the learned counsel would cite the order dated 7.3.1995 in the proceedings of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Papanasam in CST 215856/1989-1990, 1990-1991, 1991-1992, 1992-1993 and 1993-1994 respectively to ultimately over ruling the objections finally levy a penalty of Rs.21,051/- in W.P.No.13415 of 1999, Rs.11,738/- in W.P.No.13416 of 1999, Rs.27,038/- in W.P.No.13417 of 1999, Rs.28,856/- in W.P.No.13418 of 1999 and Rs.2,297/- respectively under Section 10(A) of the CST Act 1956 as proposed in the notices; that the penalty was minimised and has pointed out in the order; if there is a technical violation, we cannot levy penalty under Section 10(b) of the Act. In the above order of the Single Judge of this court quoting G.O.Ms.No.61 Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department dated 24.1.1984, it is stated therein that the assessing authorities are to take a lenient view, wherever the dealers purchased goods on the basis of the 'C' forms, without including them in the registration certificate it is in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , thereby directing a lenient view to be taken in such matters, the Tribunal's order was justified. In the last judgment cited above, it is held: "that the bona fide use of the form by the dealer, who had used these items in the goods manufactured by it had been accepted by the assessing officer. That plea could not be said to have been lacking in bona fides as it had uniformly been accepted in all the earlier assessment orders and the certificate was also subsequently amended to include these other items. Having regard to these facts, the dealer could not be said to have committed an offence under Section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956(see para 4)" "4. In this case, the bona fide use of the form by the assessee, who had used these items in the goods manufactured by him has been accepted by the assessing officer. That plea cannot be said to have been lacking in bona fides as it had uniformly been accepted in all the earlier assessment orders and the certificate was also subsequently amended to include these other items. Having regard to these facts, the assessee cannot be said to have committed an offence under Section 10 (b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. We therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings of the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Chennai Suo motu Revision by the office of the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai wherein the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Thanjavur was impugned, which itself was based on the assessment made by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Papanasam in GST No.215856/89-90,90-91,91-92,92-93 and 93-94 respectively. 11. The subject matter is pertaining to the assessment of the petitioner by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Papanasam for the years 19 89-90,1990-91,1991-92 and 1993-94 under Section 10(A) of the CST Act levied penalty of Rs.21,051/- in W.P.No.13415 of 1999, Rs.11,738/- in W.P.No.13416 of 1999, Rs.27,038/- in W.P.No.13417 of 1999, Rs.28,856 /- in W.P.No.13418 of 1999 and Rs.2,297/- respectively. 12. It further comes to be known that aggrieved of the order of the assessing officer that the petitioner dealer had preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Thanjavur based on certain reasons and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Thanjavur modified the case on certain grounds in exercise of his powers and levied only a penalty of Rs.1,500/- fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offence is a continuing offence with a fine, which may extend to Rs.50/- for every day, during which period, the offence continues. Section 10(b) of the Act would also impose the same punishment, if any person being a registered dealer, falsely represents without purchasing any class of goods, that goods or such nature of goods are covered by the certificate of registration. 15. So far as the order made by the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Chennai in passing of the impugned order is concerned, he has jurisdiction to suo motu commence proceedings as he has done in this case and to arrive at his own conclusion, on such subjects as one in hand. He has also followed the procedures established by law with due opportunity for parties to be heard and dealing with the subject in the manner that it has to be dealt with and having its own discussion on the subject based on records and in consideration of the legal points and in exercise of the powers conferred on him by law and has arrived at his own conclusion to set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Thanjavur restoring the order of the Assessing Officer and in the whole of the said process, the authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
