Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether section 8(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, which imposes a penalty when raw material purchased at the concessional rate under section 8(1) is used otherwise than for the specified purpose, is ultra vires the Constitution and beyond the legislative competence of the State.
Analysis: The concessional rate under section 8(1) was held to be a statutory benefit available only on the condition that the raw material be used for manufacture of goods for sale within the State or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. A dealer who voluntarily avails the concession accepts the accompanying restriction and cannot claim a constitutional right to disregard it while retaining the benefit. The penalty provision in section 8(2) was treated as ancillary and incidental to the enforcement of section 8(1), designed to prevent abuse of the concession and evasion of the ordinary rate of tax. Such a measure was held to fall within the State's legislative competence under entry 54 of List II and not to infringe articles 19(1)(g), 301 or 304 of the Constitution.
Conclusion: Section 8(2) is valid and intra vires. The penalty imposed on the petitioner was lawful.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the penalty provision failed, and the petition was dismissed with costs.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory concession in sales tax may validly be coupled with a restrictive condition and an ancillary penalty provision to prevent misuse and tax evasion, and such a provision does not become unconstitutional merely because a dealer prefers to retain the concession while breaching its conditions.