Just a moment...
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, for quantification of penalty under section 17(3)(b)(ii) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, the expression "month or part thereof" treats an incomplete month as a full month or requires proportionate computation.
Analysis: The provision imposed penalty at a prescribed monthly rate for every month or part thereof during which the default continued. The expression "part thereof" was construed to mean a period shorter than a complete month, so that penalty must correspond to the actual period of delay and not be automatically charged as if a full month had elapsed. A contrary construction, treating any part of a month as a whole month, was held inconsistent with the language of the provision. The interpretation adopted by the assessing authority and first appellate authority was preferred, and the view taken by the Tribunal was rejected.
Conclusion: The expression "month or part thereof" requires proportionate levy for the actual period of default, not treatment of a part of a month as a full month. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a penal statute provides for levy for every month or part thereof, an incomplete month cannot be equated with a full month unless the language clearly so provides; the penalty must be computed proportionately to the period of delay.