https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151583 Penalty under section 16(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act could not be sustained because the assessing authority had not recorded a specific finding that the assessee wilfully failed to disclose assessable turnover. The provision is penal in nature and requires proof of a culpable mental element; mere rejection of the explanation or addition to turnover on the basis of suppression is insufficient. The High Court also noted that revisional interference under section 38 is limited to errors of law, and no such error was shown in the appellate order deleting the penalty. The revision was therefore rejected. en-us Mon, 03 Oct 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:25:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151583 Penalty under section 16(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act could not be sustained because the assessing authority had not recorded a specific finding that the assessee wilfully failed to disclose assessable turnover. The provision is penal in nature and requires proof of a culpable mental element; mere rejection of the explanation or addition to turnover on the basis of suppression is insufficient. The High Court also noted that revisional interference under section 38 is limited to errors of law, and no such error was shown in the appellate order deleting the penalty. The revision was therefore rejected. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 03 Oct 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151583