1996 (3) TMI 491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1958, at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law has been referred by the Board of Revenue for answer by this Court: "Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was justified in setting aside the remand order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner as unjustified and improper, while the case was remanded by the first appellate authority for r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of monthly tax according to rules is not justified. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner accordingly remanded the case to the assessing officer for re-determination of the penalty as it is admitted that the assessee failed to deposit the tax as required by law. 3.. Aggrieved by order dated December 8, 1987, of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, the assessee approached the Board of Revenue, which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dealer fails without sufficient cause to pay the amount of tax in the manner prescribed under sub-section (2) of section 22 or to furnish his return under sub-section (1) or revised return under sub-section (2) for any period in the manner and by the date prescribed thereunder or while furnishing the return fails to furnish along with the return the proof of payment as required by sub-section (1-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....per cent of tax which may be assessed on him under section 18 and where no tax is payable, a sum not exceeding five hundred rupees; (b) where the period of default covers a period less than a month, the amount of penalty payable in respect of such period at any of the rates specified in sub-clause (a) shall be computed proportionately; (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), a sum not ....