2009 (12) TMI 887 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Penalty levied under section 12(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 read with section 9(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
2. Applicability of penalty in case of assessment made under section 12(1) of the TNGST Act.
3. Interpretation of statutory provisions and relevant case law.

Analysis:

1. The writ petition challenged the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal that deleted the penalty imposed under section 12(3)(b) of the TNGST Act along with section 9(2A) of the CST Act. The first respondent was assessed for the year 1995-96 on a total turnover of Rs. 20,60,565, with a penalty of Rs. 38,853. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner modified the order, setting aside a portion of the turnover and penalty, which was further contested by the Department before the Tribunal.

2. The issue revolved around whether the penalty could be imposed under section 12(3)(b) of the TNGST Act in cases of assessments made under section 12(1) of the same Act. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by a previous judgment in the case of Appollo Saline Pharmaceuticals, where it was held that penalties cannot be levied in such scenarios. The court reiterated that penalties are applicable only in best judgment assessments, not when assessments are based solely on the accounts provided by the assessee.

3. The court referred to the legislative intent behind the relevant sections and highlighted the amendments made over time. It emphasized that penalties should only be imposed in cases of best judgment assessments, excluding those solely based on the accounts furnished by the assessee. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision based on the statutory provisions and the legal precedent set by previous judgments, concluding that the penalty deletion was in line with the law.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the Tribunal's decision to delete the penalty levied under section 12(3)(b) of the TNGST Act read with section 9(2A) of the CST Act. The judgment emphasized the importance of aligning penalties with the type of assessment conducted and upheld the legal principles established by previous court rulings.