Mens rea in false representation under the Central Sales Tax regime was essential for penalty where deliberate misstatement was proved.

Section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act was construed as requiring more than an inaccurate declaration: "false representation" under a penal provision imports deliberate misstatement with guilty intent. A dealer issuing a C Form is represented as claiming the goods are covered by the registration certificate, and liability arises only where that declaration is knowingly untrue. On the stated facts, penalty under section 10-A was upheld where the dealer's conduct showed a deliberate attempt to secure a lower tax rate, but it was not sustained where the purchases did not establish mens rea. The decisive requirement was proof of mens rea before penalty could attach.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, a dealer can be said to have "falsely represented" under section 10(b) only when the representation was deliberate and made with mens rea, and whether that requirement was satisfied on the facts of the connected revision petitions.

Analysis: The expression "falsely represents" in section 10(b) was construed as importing more than a merely inaccurate or untrue statement; the context of a penal provision supporting imprisonment indicated that a guilty mind was essential. A dealer who issues a "C" Form declares that the goods purchased are covered by the registration certificate, and if that declaration is made knowingly in respect of goods not so covered, the statutory offence is attracted. On the facts of one set of petitions, the explanation given by the dealer showed a deliberate use of the forms to obtain a lower tax rate, and the finding of false representation was upheld. On the facts of the other petitions, the purchases of oils for soap manufacture did not establish a deliberate falsehood or guilty mind, and the penal consequence could not stand.

Conclusion: Mens rea is an essential ingredient of an offence under section 10(b). Penalty under section 10-A was sustained in the petition where deliberate false representation was found, and was quashed in the petitions where such guilty intention was not proved.

Final Conclusion: The revision petitions produced mixed results: one set failed and was dismissed, while the other set succeeded and the penalty orders were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: For section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, "false representation" means a deliberate misrepresentation made with guilty intent, and penalty under section 10-A cannot be sustained unless that element is established on the facts.

---