https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225 The article examines penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act in three settings. It states that the Assistant Commissioner, as the officer competent to assess after transfer of the file, was also competent to levy penalty, and the jurisdiction objection failed. It further states that use of form C for goods outside the registration certificate, including chemicals and machinery parts, amounted to false representation and justified penalty. For printing ink used in job-work, the decisive question was whether the third party had sold the processed goods; because that factual issue was not fully determined, the matter was remitted for a limited finding. en-us Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Feb 2014 11:18:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225 The article examines penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act in three settings. It states that the Assistant Commissioner, as the officer competent to assess after transfer of the file, was also competent to levy penalty, and the jurisdiction objection failed. It further states that use of form C for goods outside the registration certificate, including chemicals and machinery parts, amounted to false representation and justified penalty. For printing ink used in job-work, the decisive question was whether the third party had sold the processed goods; because that factual issue was not fully determined, the matter was remitted for a limited finding. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225