2000 (3) TMI 1063 - AT - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Dispute over the levy of 12% tax on sales of milk products
- Claim of penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the Act

Analysis:
1. Dispute over 12% Tax Levy:
- The case involved a dispute regarding the levy of 12% tax on sales of milk products totaling Rs. 57,17,537. The assessing authority proposed the tax along with a penalty of 100% of the tax amount due to discrepancies in tax payment. The petitioner argued that the brand name "Cocomilk" was unregistered, questioning the tax levy. However, both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal upheld the 12% tax levy, stating that registration of the brand name was not necessary for taxation under the relevant Act.

2. Penalty under Section 12(3)(b) of the Act:
- The Appellate Tribunal confirmed the penalty corresponding to the tax levy issue. The petitioner contested the penalty, claiming no wilful omission and no basis for the penalty. However, the Tribunal found that the penalty was justified under section 12(3)(b)(iii) of the Act due to the discrepancy between the tax assessed and the tax paid exceeding 25%. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty under this section is warranted for incorrect or incomplete returns, regardless of wilful intent. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty was correctly applied as per the provisions of the Act, and there was no basis for interference.

In summary, the Tribunal dismissed the tax revision case, upholding the 12% tax levy on milk products and the corresponding penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the Act. The Tribunal found no errors in the application of tax and penalty provisions, emphasizing the legal requirements and precedents governing such cases.