https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152608 Penalty under section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, required wilful non-disclosure of turnover, but the assessing order did not have to repeat the statutory words verbatim if it otherwise showed application of mind to deliberate omission. The High Court treated "suppression" and "concealment" as conveying intentional non-disclosure and applied earlier reasoning under section 16(2) to the amended provision. On that basis, the finding of suppression was sufficient to sustain the penalty, and the challenge to the revisional order failed. en-us Tue, 13 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:55:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152608 Penalty under section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, required wilful non-disclosure of turnover, but the assessing order did not have to repeat the statutory words verbatim if it otherwise showed application of mind to deliberate omission. The High Court treated "suppression" and "concealment" as conveying intentional non-disclosure and applied earlier reasoning under section 16(2) to the amended provision. On that basis, the finding of suppression was sufficient to sustain the penalty, and the challenge to the revisional order failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 13 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152608