9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (1) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded on 31st December, 1957. The Commercial Tax Officer assessed them on a turnover of Rs. 2,59,720 to a tax of Rs. 7,791-60 nP. The assessment proceedings were started in the year 1959. The accused had submitted no return, with the result that the Commercial Tax Officer had to make the assessment on the material available to him to the best of his judgment. He passed the assessment order on 15th January, 1960, and sent demand notices to all the accused. The assessment order was served personally only on accused No. 1. The demand notices, however, were sought to be served on each of the partners. The 1st accused was served in person. Service on accused 2 and 3 was effected by affixture of the notices on their respective houses. Accused 4 refused to receive the notice, and it was affixed on his house. All the accused failed to pay the amount within the prescribed period. Proceedings were started under the Revenue Recovery Act, but with great difficulty, a sum of Rs. 1,923-02 nP. could be collected and that from only the 1st accused. The balance due still was Rs. 5,868-58 nP. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer after obtaining due sanction from the Commercial Tax Officer lodged a crimi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to the advent of rule 14-A is punishable under rule 16 read with rule 14-A(7). That must essentially turn on the true interpretation of the terms of rule 14-A read with rule 16. Having regard to its clear terms, there does not appear to be much scope for the argument that rule 14-A is retrospective in operation. The question posed, however, seems to involve, if at all, only incidentally the point whether that rule is retrospective in effect. It is well-settled that no statute or its provision shall be construed to have a retrospective operation unless such construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication. It is also well recognised that the penal provisions have to be strictly construed. Indeed the rule of strict construction requires that the language shall be so construed that no cases shall be held to fall within it which do not fall both within the reasonable meaning of its terms and within the spirit and scope of the enactment. No violence should be done to its language, especially when the enactment entails penal consequences, to bring people within it, but rather care must be taken that no one is brought within it wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rants. Again, when we look to sub-rule (5) or (6) both of them in turn refer to sub-rules (1) and (2) of rule 14-A. The conclusion of breach punishable in law has therefore to be reached only on consideration of all the said sub-rules. Subrule (6) referred to in sub-rule (7) which is relevant for our purposes reads thus: "If no return or returns have been submitted by the dealer as required by sub-rules (1) and (2) or if any return or returns submitted by him appear to the assessing authority to be incorrect or incomplete the assessing authority shall after making such enquiry as he considers necessary and after giving the dealer an opportunity of proving the correctness and completeness of the return or returns submitted by him determine the turnover to the best of his judgment and finally assess in a single order the tax or taxes payable under the Act." The assessment contemplated by this sub-rule which has to be made in due compliance with the procedure laid down therein is of necessity confined to the period for which the returns are to be submitted under sub-rules (1) and (2). Sub-rule (2) need not come up for consideration as admittedly it has no bearing on the instant case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liance with the demand notice served on the accused for payment of tax due under final assessment made under sub-rule (5) or (6) of rule 14-A for the period covered by subrules (1) and (2) of the said rule. Rule 16 then will not be attracted and non-compliance with the demand notice will not be punishable thereunder if all the essential requirements of sub-rule (7) are not fulfilled. It must always be remembered that sub-rule (7) by necessary implication attracts the provisions of sub-rules (1), (2), (5) and (6). In fact all these sub-rules put together make it a complete whole. So then the conclusion whether there has been a breach of rule 14-A(7) punishable under rule 16 must necessarily be reached on the cumulative effect of all the said provisions. Indisputably, rule 14-A by reference to them, whether directly or indirectly, has imported in itself all the said provisions. If this approach is correct, as it must necessarily be, on the clear language and intendment of the crucial provisions, the conclusion is irresistible that since the tax due relates to a period not falling within the ambit of sub-rules (1) and (2) of rule 14-A, non-payment thereof in due compliance with the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... state once again at this stage the principles of construction of penal provisions which are well settled and which we have set out in the earlier part of this judgment. It is then argued that by pronouncing on the scope of subrules (1) and (2) and their connection with sub-rules (5), (6) and (7) a criminal court, either in fact or in effect, shall be pronouncing on the validity of the final assessment itself, even though that is not within its province or permitted domain. No doubt, a criminal court has no jurisdiction to go into the question as to the process of assessment and sit in judgment on the assessment made by competent authority. That is exclusively the duty of the hierarchy of officers appointed under the statute. But there is no reason why a criminal court should not be at liberty to construe the statutory provisions in order to ascertain the guilt or the innocence of the accused which is its appointed province. Evidently, the function and the duty of the criminal court is different from that of the assessing authority. Each of them is independent of the other in their respective field of operation. Concerned as it is essentially with the question of guilt or innoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
