TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1967 (4) TMI 137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1963, in Miscellaneous Application No. 253 of 1959. The appellant, hereinafter called the "assessee", was a dealer in sugar at Agra. It was assessed to sales tax for the assessment year 1954-55. The assessee furnished a return disclosing its gross and net turnover at Rs. 94,29,138-14.0 and Rs. 665-9-3 respectively. The return was filed under section 7 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, hereinafter called the "Act", which was to the following effect: "7. Determination of turnover and assessment of tax.-(1) Every dealer who is liable to pay tax under this Act shall submit such return or returns of his turnover of the previous year or the assessment year as may be applicable within such period, in such form and verified in such manner, as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The assessee did not furnish any information nor did it furnish a return of its turnover. Instead the assessee furnished a typed statement showing import of sugar valued at Rs. 3,29,020. After making an enquiry the Sales Tax Officer found that the statement furnished by the assessee was again incorrect and he assessed the amount of the imported sugar at Rs. 7,12,914-10-6 and made an assessment of an additional tax of Rs. 22,278-9-6. A notice of this demand was issued to the assessee requiring it to pay the amount within a certain time, but the assessee failed to comply with the notice. Accordingly on April 25, 1956, the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice under section 15-A of the Act calling upon the assessee to show cause why penalties shou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice under section 15-A was issued on August 8, 1956. The Sales Tax Officer then obtained approval of the Commissioner, Sales Tax, for imposition of a penalty of Rs. 17,000. After hearing the assessee the Sales Tax Officer held that a penalty of Rs. 17,000 should be imposed. According to the Sales Tax Officer the amount of tax avoided was Rs. 11,406-4-6 and the penalty should be fixed at one and one-half times the tax avoided. This order of penalty was upheld by the Judge (Appeals) but on revision the Judge (Revisions) held that the assessee was liable to pay a penalty of only Rs. 1,659-8-0 and ordered that the balance of the penalty should be refunded. The order was based on the view that there was concealment of only Rs. 1,077-8-6 whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rnover disclosed in the proceedings under section 21 of the Act and as the assessee admitted the turnover to the extent of Rs. 3,30,520 in those proceedings and the final assessment was on Rs. 3,65,000, the penalty must be levied only with regard to the concealment of particulars to the extent of Rs. 34,480. It was submitted that the default referred to in clause (b) of section 15-A(I) must have been committed in the very proceeding in which the satisfaction of the assessing authority is derived. In our opinion, there is no substance in the contention put forward on behalf of the appellant. It is important to notice that section 21 of the Act does not require the assessee to furnish a return or particulars of its turnover. The notice to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 21. The concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars must be in the return furnished under section 7. Clause (a) of section 15-A(1) deals with the failure of the assessee to furnish the return of the turnover which he is required to furnish under section 7 or the failure of the assessee to furnish it within the time allowed or in the manner prescribed. Clause (b) of that section deals with the concealment or inaccurate furnishing of particulars of the turnover in respect of which the return was required to be filed and which is referred to in clause (a). It follows therefore that even if in response to a notice issued under section 21(1) the assessee files a fresh statement of its turnover it is still liable to be penalised und....