2013 (10) TMI 1335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourt on the following questions of law: "(a) Whether the learned Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal was right in law in deleting the interest under section 11B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act ? (b) Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest liability can be calculated from the date the tax is deter mined or quantified and not from the date from which the tax became due ?" The controversy, in brief, is that the petitioner-assessing officer passed an assessment order for the assessment year 1986-87 on March 6, 1993, holding that the commodity "Swad" is not a drug or medicine but is confectionery item and was accordingly liable to be taxed at the general rate of 10 per cent. and not at the concessional rate of six p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tax was quantified" and nothing more. The respondent-assessee wilfully did not disclose the sale of the above commodity as taxable and avoided clear legal tax liability and therefore, interest burden was part of the tax from day one. She accordingly prayed that the interest, being consequential, ought to have been levied from day one and not in the way the Tax Tribunal has directed. Mr. Alkesh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, on the contrary, submits that the Tax Tribunal was correct and justified in coming to the said conclusion that interest was to be levied only from the quantification of the tax. He also submits that the impugned controversy in regard to even levy of tax is pending before the Tax Tribunal (now Tax B....