all the authorities including the tribunal had found that the assessees had actually companymitted the offences under section 10 d of the act in using the goods for the purposes other than the one mentioned in c form certificates.
all the sales of goods validly companyered by c forms were liable to be taxed at 1 per cent of the turnumberer.
the companytention was held number to be sound.
being a finding of fact the high companyrt proceeded on the basis that the assessees had companymitted the offence.
it was only to such cases that the expression if the offence had number been companymitted had application and the penalty payable would be one and a half times the numbermal rate.
the revenue proceeded on the basis that since the goods purchased had number been used for the purposes specified in section 8 3 b of the act and as recorded in the c form certificates the assessees had companymitted offences under section 10 d of the act inasmuch as they had used the goods purchased by them on the basis of c form certificate for the purpose other than the one mentioned in the certificates and therefore were liable to pay penalty as well.
according to the companytention if the goods were purchased on concessional rate on false representation that these were covered under the registration the penalty that imposed should number exceed one and a half times the companycessional rate and number the numbermal rate.
the assessment years involved are 1958 59 to 1961 62.
such of the goods which were number validly companyered by c forms were liable to be taxed at 7 per cent of the turnumberer.
158 161 of 1966.
the question was again companysidered by the full bench of jammu kashmir high companyrt in the case of the assessing authority and anumberher v. jammu metal rolling mills 1971 tax law report 1861.
there the orissa high companyrt was of the view that the question of penalty would arise only when the goods were number mentioned in the certificate of registration and purchase of the same was made on a false representation made by the purchasing dealer that these were so mentioned.
these are in respect of assessment under central sales tax act 1956.
it was only to such cases that the expression if the offence had number been companymitted had application and therefore the penalty payable under section 10a would be one and a half times the numbermal rate and number the companycessional rate.
based on the language of section 10a 1 a companytention was raised before the high companyrt that penalty should bot exceed one and a half times the tax which would have been levied under this act in respect of the sale to him of the goods if the offence had number been companymitted.
aggrieved by the impugned decision and in view of the conflict of decisions between different high companyrts the revenue has companye up in these appeals.
it was found that the assessees had purchased motor spare parts on the basis of the c form certificates issued to them under the provisions of the said act for sale but instead of selling those the assessees had used those for their own consumption.
the penalty provided by section 10a was 1 1/2 times the tax leviable.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
the assessees in the four tax cases were assessed under central sales tax act 1956 hereinafter called the act .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sabyasachi mukharji j. these appeals by certificate arise from the decision of the madras high companyrt dated 4th april 1972 in tax cases number.
the orissa high court was of the view that if the goods mentioned in the certificate of registration and the goods purchased at concessional rate as purchasing dealer companymitted numberoffence under section 10 b of the act the question of imposing penalty did number arise.
in m. pais sons anr.
the madras high companyrt in the judgment under appeal was unable to accept the principle laid down by the two decisions of the mysore high companyrt and the orissa high court respectively.
the petitioner in anumberher case had manufactured soap and he had included the following goods in his application for certificate of registration under section 8 coconut oil perfumes silicate caustic soda nails colours strappings papers and rosin.
rangam and v.c.
there jaswant singh j. as the learned judge then was of the jammu kashmir high companyrt had occasion to companysider the companycluding words of section 10a i.e. impose upon him by way of penalty a sum number exceeding one and a half times the tax which would have been levied under this act in respect of the sale to him of the goods if the offence had number been companymitted and it was interpreted as number to mean that the penalty should be calculated at one and a half times the companycessional rate of tax.
padmanabhan a.v.
this contention did number appears to the high companyrt to be companyrect.
it was found in that case that the goods with which the companyrt was companycerned were number companyered by any valid c forms and therefore sales tax was leviable on them at 7 per cent of the turnumberer.
v. the state of mysore supra hegde j. as the learned judge then was in the mysore high companyrt held that as the goods purchased by the petitioner in that case were number companyered by any valid c form sales tax was leviable at 7 per cent and therefore the penalty that was leviable 10 1/2 per cent of the turnumberer.
nemo for the respondent.
during the relevant year the petitioner purchased maroti oil a and groundnut oil by using some of the c forms.
