TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (4) TMI 228
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in reducing the penalty imposed under section 16(1)(j) of the Act from Rs. 8,000 to Rs. 2,000? Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a dealer in electric goods and steel pipes. During the period April 12, 1981 to April 1, 1982, i.e., 1981-82 the assessee has effected the sale of Rs. 1,05,030 to the Executive Engineer, P.H.E.D. of steel pipes on which 4 per cent tax was shown payable in the return. At the time of assessment, it was found by the assessing authority that the assessee has collected 10 per cent tax and the tax at 4 per cent only was deposited. It was stated before the assessing authority that there is a dispute with regard to the rate of tax with the buyer. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was given in the return submitted that the tax had been collected at 10 per cent. The levy of interest was set aside on the ground that the tax has been held payable at 4 per cent, which has already been deposited and as such interest is not leviable. The appellate authority also observed that in respect of the amount retained by him, the provisions of section 23-B could be invoked. Against the above order, the appeals were preferred before the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal by the assessee as well as by the assessing authority. The Sales Tax Tribunal came to the conclusion that the maximum penalty leviable under section 16(1)(j) is Rs. 2,000 and therefore, the penalty of Rs. 8,000 cannot be upheld. The reasoning for upholding penalty to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shall be liable to forfeiture to the State Government, a sum not exceeding Rs. 2,000 could be levied by way of penalty. The authority relied upon by Mr. Bafna refers that the forfeiture is a kind of penalty and the word "forfeited" may bear meaning "liable to forfeiture" at the will of the person to whom the right of forfeiture is given and does not, in every case, imply automatic forfeiture. It has further been observed that the Commissioner will issue a notice to the assessee to show cause why a penalty, with or without forfeiture, should not be imposed on him. Such a notice with specific reference to forfeiture, points to an option in the Commissioner to forfeit or not to forfeit or partly to forfeit. From the above observations of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent that if it was not legally payable it will be returned": (Words and Phrases, page 274). On the basis of this decision, the Supreme Court has held that "collected" will not cover the amounts gathered tentatively to be given back if found non-exigible from the dealer. From the above judgment of the honourable Supreme Court, it is evident that the proceedings for forfeiture and penalty are separate and show cause notice is required to be issued to the assessee as to why penalty with or without forfeiture should not be imposed. There may be circumstances, where it could be considered that the amount had not been collected by the assessee, since it had already been refunded or that he is ready to return, in that case no action for forfeitur....