Criminal prosecution for tax default cannot reopen a completed assessment; conviction stood, but fines were reduced.

Where a tax assessment has been completed under the statutory procedure and the Act provides specific remedies such as objection, revision and reference, a criminal court hearing prosecution for non-payment cannot reopen the validity of the assessment or decide the taxpayer's underlying liability. The Court therefore rejected the challenge to the tax demand and sustained the conviction, holding that the argument that the contract was a works contract did not justify interference on the record before it. On sentence, however, it found the original fines excessive in light of the tax default and reduced the fines.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner could resist prosecution under the sales tax law by challenging the underlying assessment and liability to tax; and whether the fines imposed on conviction required reduction.

Analysis: The assessment had been made in the manner prescribed by the Act, and the statutory remedies against the levy were by objection, revision, and reference on a question of law. In prosecution for enforcement of a tax demand, the criminal court could not reopen or adjudicate the validity of the assessment. The contention that the contract was a works contract and therefore outside the taxing provision was not accepted as a ground for interference on the record before the Court. On sentence, the Court took into account the amount of tax default and found the original fines excessive.

Conclusion: The challenge to the tax liability was rejected, but the fines were reduced.

Final Conclusion: The tax demand and conviction were sustained, and only the sentence was modified by lowering the fines.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a tax assessment has been made under the statutory procedure and the Act provides specific remedies, a criminal court dealing with prosecution for non-payment cannot go behind the assessment or decide its validity.

---