1977 (10) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der the M.P. General ST Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the calendar year 1964. The tax assessed was Rs. 67,329. The assessing authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,000 under s. 17(3) of the Act and Rs. 5,000 under s. 43 of the Act. In first appeal before the Dy. CST, the latter held that penalty under s. 17(3) of the Act, which was imposed on the ground that the returns, which d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t all the sales were reported by him in the returns. As regards purchases from unregistered dealers, which are liable to purchase tax, the dealer was following the practice of disclosing these at the time of assessment and paying purchase tax on them. The same procedure was followed during the assessment year in question and tax payable on these purchases viz. Rs. 12,000 was deposited along with a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion, therefore, is whether the dealer acted dishonestly, which is not showing the purchases from unregistered dealer were libale to purchase tax, in the returns. It does not appear to be so. In the first place, there seems to be no doubt that this was being done in accordance with past practice and the Department had not objected to such practice. In fact, the first year in which the objection wa....