https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163477 A dealer's penalty under section 12B(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was justified where advance tax fell short and cheques were repeatedly issued without sufficient funds, because deliberate non-compliance could attract civil penalty even without mens rea. Financial hardship did not warrant deletion of the penalty absent material showing a genuine and reasonable cause for repeated default, especially where payment was made only after coercive recovery steps. The existence of a separate penalty under section 13(2) did not bar action under section 12B(3), as the two provisions operated in different fields. The Tribunal's interference with the reduced penalty was therefore unsustainable. en-us Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:57:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163477 A dealer's penalty under section 12B(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was justified where advance tax fell short and cheques were repeatedly issued without sufficient funds, because deliberate non-compliance could attract civil penalty even without mens rea. Financial hardship did not warrant deletion of the penalty absent material showing a genuine and reasonable cause for repeated default, especially where payment was made only after coercive recovery steps. The existence of a separate penalty under section 13(2) did not bar action under section 12B(3), as the two provisions operated in different fields. The Tribunal's interference with the reduced penalty was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163477