Penalty proceedings under the Central Sales Tax Act were outside the relief-undertaking bar and could continue.

A penalty proceeding initiated under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was held not to be a "legal proceeding" within section 4(1) of the M.P. Sahayata Upakram (Vishesh Upabandha) Adhiniyam, 1965. The Adhiniyam's explanation confined "legal proceeding" to proceedings commenced by a plaint, petition, appeal, review, revision, reference, execution, or a similar application or petition, and that definition could not be expanded beyond its express terms. As a result, the statutory bar on institution or continuance of proceedings against a relief undertaking did not apply, and the penalty proceeding could validly continue.

---

---

Issues: Whether a penalty proceeding under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, is a "legal proceeding" within section 4(1) of the M.P. Sahayata Upakram (Vishesh Upabandha) Adhiniyam, 1965, so as to be barred from being proceeded with during the relief undertaking period.

Analysis: Section 4 of the 1965 Adhiniyam stayed institution or continuance of suits and other legal proceedings against a relief undertaking, but the explanation gave "legal proceeding" an exhaustive meaning limited to proceedings started on a petition, plaint, memorandum of appeal, application for review, revision or reference, execution, or any other similar application or petition. A penalty proceeding initiated under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act did not fall within that defined class. The definition could not be enlarged beyond its express terms, and the continuance of such penalty proceedings was not affected by section 4.

Conclusion: The penalty proceeding under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was not a legal proceeding within section 4(1) of the M.P. Sahayata Upakram (Vishesh Upabandha) Adhiniyam, 1965, and it could validly proceed to conclusion; the answer was against the assessee.

---