https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127741 A prosecution for wilfully filing an incomplete and incorrect sales tax return under section 15(2)(a) was not barred by an unaccepted compounding proposal, because a mere offer or fixation of compounding fee did not complete the compounding transaction. The challenge to rule 13 also failed, as that rule governed return and assessment procedure while the charge arose under the substantive offence provision. The later substitution of section 15 did not render the offence invalid, since no clear retrospective intent was shown. The revisions were therefore rejected and the prosecution maintained. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:55:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127741 A prosecution for wilfully filing an incomplete and incorrect sales tax return under section 15(2)(a) was not barred by an unaccepted compounding proposal, because a mere offer or fixation of compounding fee did not complete the compounding transaction. The challenge to rule 13 also failed, as that rule governed return and assessment procedure while the charge arose under the substantive offence provision. The later substitution of section 15 did not render the offence invalid, since no clear retrospective intent was shown. The revisions were therefore rejected and the prosecution maintained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 25 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127741