Excess tax collection penalty requires actual overcollection; separate billing alone is insufficient where total price remains unchanged.

Penalty for excess tax collection could be imposed only if the dealer actually collected tax beyond the amount payable. Here, the total consideration in the original and revised bills remained the same, and petroleum prices were fixed by the Ministry of Petroleum in accordance with Government-controlled pricing. Separate disclosure of sales tax in the original bills, followed by revised composite billing, did not by itself establish collection of tax in excess of the tax payable. Penalty under section 16(1)(j)(ii) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 was therefore not leviable, and the revision failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty could be imposed under section 16(1)(j)(ii) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 on the footing that the dealer had collected tax in excess of the tax payable by showing sales tax separately in the original bills and later issuing revised bills with a composite price.

Analysis: Penalty under the provision could arise only where a registered dealer had actually collected any amount by way of tax in excess of the tax payable. The total amount in the original bills and the revised bills was the same. The prices of petroleum products were fixed by the Ministry of Petroleum and the billing was in accordance with the Government-fixed prices. Mere separate disclosure of the tax component in the original bills did not establish collection of tax in excess so as to attract the penal provision.

Conclusion: Penalty was not leviable under section 16(1)(j)(ii) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, and the revision failed.

Final Conclusion: The levy of penalty was set aside in substance, and the assessee succeeded on the only substantive issue decided.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for excess collection of tax cannot be sustained unless the dealer is shown to have actually collected tax in excess of the tax payable.

---