1969 (10) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... business of serving meals at his Bhojnalaya at Ajmer. The Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Ajmer, by his order dated 16th August, 1955, imposed a penalty of Rs. 11 on the assessee under section 16(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the Act), as in his view the assessee failed to get himself registered as required by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Act. The Sales Tax Off .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tax Officer was set aside. It was also observed by the learned Member that in case the assessee was found selling chapatis, they should be treated as exempted goods under the Act as they were covered in the category of exempted goods, being another form of parantha and puris. On the application of the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, this court directed that the Board of Revenue should make a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le to pay penalty in addition to the fees payable by him a sum not exceeding Rs. 100. Section 6(5) of the Act which is material for answering question No. (1) runs as follows: "When any dealer is penalised under section 16 in respect of any contravention of sub-section (1), the assessing authority shall, on realising the amount of penalty and the fee, register such dealer and grant him a certific .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the learned Member of the Board of Revenue. But in case the dealer is able to satisfy in appeal that he has not failed to get himself registered as required by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Act because he is not a dealer liable to pay tax under the Act, no penalty can be imposed on him and when no penalty can be imposed on him, the assessing authority cannot register him as a dealer. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... No. 15 of 1968 decided on 22nd October, 1969, we have pointed out that revisional jurisdiction invested in the Board of Revenue under section 14 of the Act is a limited jurisdiction and can only be exercised if the conditions Reported at p. 341 supra. mentioned in that section are satisfied. In this view of the matter, our answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative. In view of this answer t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X