TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1249
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uthority (Deputy Commissioner Appeal) Trade Tax dated 21.09.1996 has been upheld. 3. In these revisions following questions of law are involved : "(i) Whether in view of the fact that alongwith the application a list has also been filed in which electrical goods and machineries were mentioned. Trade Tax Officer while disposing of the registration application has signed the list. With the intent to make list as a part of the registration certificate. As per manual the list is the part of the registration certificate, and therefore, it can not be said that the applicant was not registered for electrical goods and machineries. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal is legally justified in confirming the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Central Sales Tax. The revisionist has further drawn the attention of this Court to an order dated 29.05.1991 passed by Deputy Commissioner (Executive) Sales Tax, Lucknow, wherein, he has stated that after perusal of his application form and calling for report from the Trade Tax Officer, he has held that there was a list annexed to the application Form A, submitted by the revisionist for registration under the Central Sales Tax but it seems that registration has been granted only in respect of two items mentioned by him in the Form. It has been noticed in the said order that the registration in respect of the said goods contained in the list have not been rejected. He is further of the opinion that probably the said list was not brought....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner (Executive) Trade Tax, which has been passed after perusal of the record and also after calling for a report from the Assessing Authority, discloses the fact that the revisionist had in fact enclosed the list of items for which he was likely to trade in and for which he was thereby authorized to issue Form C. The revisionist under the mistaken belief submitted that the registration has been granted even for the items for which he had disclosed in the list, continued to issue Form C. The order dated 29.05.1991 further states that in case registration has not been granted with respect to the items contained in the list and the competent authority should proceed to take a decision after giving an opportunity to the revisionist. Admittedl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essential element of an offence created under a taxing statute, regard must be had to the following factors: (i) the object and scheme of the statute; (ii) the language of the section and; (iii) the nature of penalty. 18. It is true that the object of Section 10(b) of the Act is to prevent any misuse of the registration certificate but the legislature has, in the said Section, used the expression "falsely represents" in contradistinction to "wrongly represents". Therefore, what we are required to construe is whether the words "falsely represents" would cover a mere incorrect representation or would embrace only such representations which are knowingly, wilfully and intentionally false. 19. According to the Black's Law Dictionary (6t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o stretch of imagination fall within the four corners of the said certificate. Once the first appellate authority came to a conclusion that it was possible to take the view that Form C was erroneously issued and that the same could be characterized as a mistake, the charge of a "false representation" could not have been sustained. In the absence of the authorities having formed the opinion that the assessee had falsely represented the import to be one covered by his certificate of registration, the imposition of penalty is clearly rendered unsustainable. This Court even otherwise finds no material circumstance which would justify a conclusion." 17. In the present case, it is the revisionist who claims to have submitted a list of goods al....