https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158999 Penalty under section 19(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 must rest on the dealer's attributable omission and on the assessing authority's independent quasi-judicial discretion. Where the first appellate authority enhanced penalty pursuant to a superior authority's communication, rather than on its own judicial assessment, the enhancement was invalid because executive direction vitiates the exercise of appellate power. On the facts, the assessee had itself sought reopening of the assessment, but that did not cure the defect in the manner of enhancement. The Tribunal was therefore justified in setting aside the enhanced penalty, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. en-us Mon, 20 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:25:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158999 Penalty under section 19(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 must rest on the dealer's attributable omission and on the assessing authority's independent quasi-judicial discretion. Where the first appellate authority enhanced penalty pursuant to a superior authority's communication, rather than on its own judicial assessment, the enhancement was invalid because executive direction vitiates the exercise of appellate power. On the facts, the assessee had itself sought reopening of the assessment, but that did not cure the defect in the manner of enhancement. The Tribunal was therefore justified in setting aside the enhanced penalty, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 20 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158999