https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155936 Penalty proceedings under section 5B of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, required strict satisfaction of every statutory precondition, including that the declarations were furnished for goods not covered by the registration certificate at the relevant time. Because the registration endorsement permitting use of declaration forms for hooka tobacco purchases had not been corrected, the mere fact that the dealer obtained an unintended benefit from declarations issued after amendment did not by itself justify penalty. Penalty jurisdiction was distinct from tax recovery, and the Revenue could not proceed unless the ingredients of section 5B were established. The notice was therefore treated as unsustainable and quashed. en-us Tue, 27 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:55:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155936 Penalty proceedings under section 5B of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, required strict satisfaction of every statutory precondition, including that the declarations were furnished for goods not covered by the registration certificate at the relevant time. Because the registration endorsement permitting use of declaration forms for hooka tobacco purchases had not been corrected, the mere fact that the dealer obtained an unintended benefit from declarations issued after amendment did not by itself justify penalty. Penalty jurisdiction was distinct from tax recovery, and the Revenue could not proceed unless the ingredients of section 5B were established. The notice was therefore treated as unsustainable and quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 27 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155936