Revenue offence composition under sales tax law may be offered by the goods owner despite notice served on the driver.

Sections 44 to 46 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act were treated as a revenue compliance scheme aimed at preventing evasion. The duty to carry prescribed documents was linked to the dealer's tax liability, and non-compliance was characterised as a revenue offence rather than an ordinary penal offence. On that basis, the owner of the goods could offer composition of the offence even though the notice had been served on the lorry driver, because the statutory object was protection of revenue and not a strict limitation to the person initially noticed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the owner of goods had locus standi to offer composition of the offence under section 46 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 when the notice for the alleged default under section 44 had been served on the driver of the lorry.

Analysis: The provisions of sections 44 to 46 were treated as part of a revenue scheme intended to secure compliance with tax requirements and prevent evasion. The duty to carry the prescribed documents under section 44 was viewed as connected with the dealer's revenue liability, and the offence for non-compliance under section 45 was characterised as a revenue offence rather than an ordinary penal offence. On that footing, the Court held that the owner of the goods could come forward to compound the offence under section 46 even though the notice had been served on the driver, since the statutory object was the protection of revenue and not a strict personal liability confined to the driver.

Conclusion: The owner of the goods had locus standi to seek composition of the offence.

Final Conclusion: The Court recognised the owner's entitlement to intervene for compounding in a revenue default case, but the revenue appeals were ultimately disposed of in favour of the appellant authority.

Ratio Decidendi: In proceedings for composition of revenue offences under a sales tax statute, the owner of the goods may be heard to offer composition even where notice was served on the driver, because the statutory scheme is directed to securing revenue compliance rather than confining the proceeding to the person initially noticed.

---