https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144162 A subsequent prosecution under the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as distinct where the later charge under section 10(d) depended on failure to use goods for the declared purpose after purchase, while the earlier charge under section 10(b) rested on false representation at the time of purchase. On that basis, the bar under section 403 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 20(2) was rejected because the essential facts were not the same. The Court also noted unresolved questions on the certificate wording, the use of raw films in making motion pictures, and the effect of later conduct, and therefore directed fresh disposal rather than final penalty. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:36:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144162 A subsequent prosecution under the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as distinct where the later charge under section 10(d) depended on failure to use goods for the declared purpose after purchase, while the earlier charge under section 10(b) rested on false representation at the time of purchase. On that basis, the bar under section 403 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 20(2) was rejected because the essential facts were not the same. The Court also noted unresolved questions on the certificate wording, the use of raw films in making motion pictures, and the effect of later conduct, and therefore directed fresh disposal rather than final penalty. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144162