Penalty for incorrect return under sales tax law does not depend on best judgment assessment where deliberate suppression is shown.

Penalty under Section 45A(1)(d) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is attracted for filing an untrue or incorrect return and does not require a best judgment assessment under Section 19(2). Deliberate suppression of turnover and a revised return filed only after omission was pointed out established mens rea, so the penalty was justified. The revisional authority's reduction of the penalty was treated as sufficient, and the contrary earlier view was overruled.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether penalty under Section 45A(1)(d) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could be imposed only if the assessment was made to the best of judgment. (ii) Whether the assessee's intentional suppression of turnover and filing of an incorrect return justified penalty.

Issue (i): Whether penalty under Section 45A(1)(d) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could be imposed only if the assessment was made to the best of judgment.

Analysis: Section 19(2) of the Act operates in a different field and requires a best judgment assessment where turnover escapes assessment due to wilful non-disclosure. Section 45A(1)(d), however, specifically deals with the submission of an untrue or incorrect return. The absence of a best judgment assessment is therefore not a condition precedent for penalty under Section 45A(1)(d). The earlier view to the contrary was held to be incorrect.

Conclusion: Penalty under Section 45A(1)(d) does not depend on a best judgment assessment.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessee's intentional suppression of turnover and filing of an incorrect return justified penalty.

Analysis: The return initially filed omitted turnover that ought to have been disclosed, and the revised return was filed only after the assessing authority pointed out the omission. The conduct disclosed deliberate suppression and clear mens rea. The revisional authority had already reduced the penalty by half, and no further interference was warranted.

Conclusion: The penalty was validly imposed and the reduction already granted was sufficient.

Final Conclusion: The statutory basis for penalty on filing an untrue or incorrect return was upheld, the contrary earlier view was overruled, and the assessee obtained no relief.

Ratio Decidendi: For penalty under Section 45A(1)(d) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, proof of a best judgment assessment is unnecessary where the return filed is untrue or incorrect and the assessee has acted with deliberate suppression.

---