TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (10) TMI 236
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....phur roll, coal and steam coal (as raw material) the concessional rate of tax against Form 'C for the purposes of manufacturing chemicals in which the assessee was engaged. It also authorised the assessee to purchase steam coal dust and coal briquesttes for re-sale in the same form. The Assessing Authority, however, noticed that the assessee had on the strength of that certificate against Form 'C purchased Soda-ash worth Rs. 1,09,651/-and M. S. Plates of the value of Rs. 24,778/-, falsely representing that aforesaid items were covered by the certificate of registration granted to it under the Act. Consequently, the assessee was subjected to a penalty of Rs. 12,000/- under Section 10-A read with Section 10 (b) of the Act. The success....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... intended to be purchased are of the class covered by the certificate, whereas the goods are not specified in the certificate. The elements of mens rea and the intention to take advantage of the concessional rate by giving "C Form declaration with the knowledge that the declaration given was incorrect or false, are sine qua non for the imposition of penalty under the said provisions. 6. The learned Counsel for the parties have been heard. 7. For the assessee it was contended that on facts of the case no penalty could have been imposed inasmuch as, there was no false representation when the assessee made purchases of the disputed goods, which were admittedly not referred to in its registration certificate. The case set up was that on 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te of registration, which is alleged to have been made by the assessee. The entries went to show that the assessee had only filed return on Form 4 against the said receipt. The said receipt was produced before the Assessing Authority who passed the penalty order. The findings recorded were that the said receipt had been tampered by the assessee by inserting the mention of the application for amendment of the registration certificate in the receipt. The interpolation was found to have been made in a different ink and handwriting. The assessee did not produce the original receipt for the examination of the Sales TaTribunal despite the demand made by the Tribunal to produce the same. The assessee sought to rely on an affidavit filed in support....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de false representation, the ulterior motive being to avoid payment of due tax under the law and to reap benefit thereby. 9. The various findings of the Sales Tax Tribunal referred to hereinabove, are pure findings of fact, based on appreciation of evidence that was placed before it. The expression 'falsely' employed in clause (b) of Section i0 of the Act implies a purpose to deceive, sulpable negligence and signifies knowingly or negligently untrue. In the instant case, as already stated the findings of the Sales Tax Tribunal are very clear and categorical about the false representation and the ulterior motives of the assessee The subsequent conduct of the assessee in forging the documents and manipulating the receipt may be wit....