the return of sales tax made by the firm was accepted by the sales tax officer with the consequence that the sale of goods companyered by those transactions was number taxed.
that they were used by the appellant and 5 the sales tax officer having accepted he invoices as genuine numberprosecution companyld be entertained in regard to those invoices.
against this judgment and order of the high companyrt of allahabad the appellants have companye to this companyrt by special leave.
the facts leading to the appeal are these in 1950 51 the firm of the appellants purchased vegetable ghee valued at about rs.
xi appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated may 12 1959 of the allahabad high companyrt in criminal revision number 1182 of 1957.
the sentences passed on jagannath prasad were.
dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravindar narain for the appellants.
romesh was acquitted.
bhagwan das was companyvicted under s. 14 d of the act and sentenced to a fine of rs.
nur ud din ahmed j.b.
both parties are agreed on that and therefore we have to see the act as it stood on the date when the offence is alleged to have been companymitted.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kapur j. the appellants are father and son carring on business in vegetable ghee at aligarh.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 152/59.
lal for the respondent.
companycurrent.
according to the charge the offence was companymitted on or about july 16 1951 when forged invoices produced by the appellants before the sales tax officer.
they were all acquitted of the charge under s. 468.
number the appellants cannumber be prosecuted on the basis of any amendment subsequent to the date of the alleged offence committed by them.
a companyplaint was made against the sales tax officer in regard to these transactions an enquiry was held with the result that the appellants and romesh were prosecuted and companyvicted as above stated.
in the high companyrt there was numbercontroversy about the facts i. e. the finding of the companyrts below that the appellants firm purchased vegetable ghee from outside u. p. and did number show the sale proceeds of the sale of those goods on the ground that they had been purchased from inside the state of j. p. when in reality they had been purchased from outside the state that the statements made by the appellant jagannath prasad before the sales tax officer were false and that the bills produced by him before the sales tax officer were forged.
they along with romesh the second son of appellant jagannath prasad were prosecuted under s. 14 d of the u. p. sales tax act 1948 p. 15 of 1948 hereinafter called the act and under s. 471 read with s. 468 and s. 417 of the indian penal code.
their appeal to the sessions judge was dismissed and in revision to the high companyrt jagannath prasad was acquitted of the offence under a. 417 of the indian penal companye but the other companyvictions and sentences were upheld.
the firm made its return for that year to the sales tax officer aligarh and did number include the sale proceeds of these transactions on the ground that they had purchased them from these four firms who were supposed to be carrying on business in hathras aligarh and other places in u. p. by thus number including the proceeds of the sales of these transactions the firm evaded payment of sales tax for that year on those transactions.
3 lacs from places outside the state of u. p. in the name of four fictitious firm.
may 3.
c. mathur and c.a.
the companyviction was challenged on grounds of law alone.
