TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (1) TMI 334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stated by one Thiru. Krishnaraj, one of the directors of the petitioner-mill, that the petitioner was assessed by the first respondent, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruchengode. The method adopted for the assessment was as contemplated by sub-rules (2) to (7) of rule 18 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). The petitioner was enjoying the facility of filing A-2 returns and paying tax on monthly turnover basis as per the said rules. The petitioner was complying with the conditions stipulated by the said rules scrupulously till the assessment year 1976-77. Due to recession in the textile mill industry and due to labour unrest during the assessment year 1976-77, the petitioner-mill was unabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nly if the amount of tax was not paid within the time stipulated. But the second respondent dismissed the revision stating that section 24(3) was mandatory and hence no interference was called for with the assessment and imposition of penalty. A further revision to the third respondent also was dismissed by the third respondent observing that the payment of penalty under section 24(3) was mandatory and further, the question of preferring a revision did not arise. The order of the third respondent confirming the orders of the second and the first respondents were illegal according to the petitioner and are also untenable constituting errors on the face of the record, and failure to discharge the statutory obligation under the Act. 2.. Mr.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....v. State of Orissa [1970] 25 STC 211; [1972] 83 ITR 26. 3.. The decision in Sakthi Sugars Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1985] 59 STC 52 (Mad.) is relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the proposition that rule 18(3) of the Rules, along with the monthly returns, is really in the nature of self-assessment and if the liability to pay interest by way of penalty is fastened only in a case where the tax assessed is not paid within the time specified therefor in the notice of assessment, there will be no question of any notice of assessment in a case which is governed by rule 18(3) of the Rules and the provisions of section 24(3) of the Act cannot be attracted to such a case. This decision is also relied ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atic on the belated payment of tax. The levy of penalty under section 24(3) was for the belated payment. It is submitted that there are absolutely no merits in the allegations of the petitioner in paragraphs 16 to 18 of the affidavit. As already submitted in the foregoing paragraphs, there is no option for any one for the levy of penalty under section 24(3). The action of the respondents is therefore legal and valid."-(sic). 5.. The points that arise for determination in the writ petition are: (1) Whether the contention raised on behalf of the Revenue that a revision lies to the Deputy Commissioner under section 33 and as such, the writ petition is not maintainable, is to be upheld or not? (2) Whether the contention raised on behalf o....