https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156441 Penalty under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act for a mismatch between returned tax and assessed tax was not automatic. For periods before 19 January 1976, the pre-amendment provision required proof of a guilty mind, and no penalty could stand without a finding on mens rea. For periods after that date, the 80% deeming rule created only a rebuttable presumption of concealment; the assessee's explanation still had to be examined, and a finding recorded on whether it was false or unacceptable before penalty could be upheld. On that basis, the penalty was unsustainable. en-us Tue, 13 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Sep 2013 16:33:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156441 Penalty under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act for a mismatch between returned tax and assessed tax was not automatic. For periods before 19 January 1976, the pre-amendment provision required proof of a guilty mind, and no penalty could stand without a finding on mens rea. For periods after that date, the 80% deeming rule created only a rebuttable presumption of concealment; the assessee's explanation still had to be examined, and a finding recorded on whether it was false or unacceptable before penalty could be upheld. On that basis, the penalty was unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 13 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156441