1950 (12) TMI 22 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Firm's Tax Default Conviction Upheld, Burden on Disproving Liability

The court upheld the conviction of a firm under the Mysore Sales Tax Act for default in tax payment. The accused's claim of not conducting business to ... - Issues:1. Interpretation of the statement made by the accused as a plea of guilty.2. Affording the petitioner an opportunity to substantiate the contention of not being legally assessed.3. Examination of the legality of the assessment based on the expression 'fails to pay any tax assessed on him' in Section 20(b) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act.4. Consideration of the availability of remedies such as appeals, revisions, and references under the Mysore Sales Tax Act.5. Prohibition on civil courts from questioning the assessment made under the Act.6. Validity of the tax assessed in criminal court proceedings.The judgment involves a firm prosecuted for default in sales tax payment under the Mysore Sales Tax Act of 1948. The accused claimed not to have conducted any business and, thus, was not liable for assessment. The Magistrate convicted the accused, imposing a fine and ordering tax recovery. The petitioner contended that the Magistrate erred in treating the statement as a guilty plea and not allowing a chance to challenge the assessment's legality. The court referred to precedents establishing that the burden shifts to the accused once prima facie proof of liability is presented. The court found the assessment, demand notice, and non-compliance established prima facie, shifting the burden to disprove assessment onto the accused. The petitioner's argument that the court should examine the assessment's legality was dismissed, citing provisions for appeals, revisions, and restrictions on civil courts questioning assessments. The judgment upheld the conviction, emphasizing that criminal courts cannot question the validity of assessed taxes meant for penalizing defaults and enforcing payments. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.