1974 (4) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... section 7(4) of the Act to show cause why the registration certificate should not be cancelled. Two grounds were mentioned in the notice: (1) that the petitioner was directed by the Assessing Authority to file monthly returns. The return for the month of January, 1970, was to be furnished by 15th February, 1970. The return was, however, not filed by the due date; and (2) that the petitioner made bogus sales in favour of three bogus dealers. The Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer observed that the dealer was indulging in bogus sales, and that the return had not been filed in time. On these two grounds, the registration certificate was cancelled. An appeal was taken to the Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab, and the Tribunal rejected the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsel relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay[1954] 26 I.T.R. 736 (S.C.); A.I.R. 1955 S.C. 271, wherein it was observed as follows: "It is well-established that when a court of fact acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding." The learned counsel for the department, on the other hand, has drawn our attention to another Supreme Court decision in Union of India v. Sardar Bahadur1972 Services Law Reporter 355., wherein it was observed: "It may be recalled that the punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed upon the r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hi's case[1973] 31 S.T.C 229; 1973 Revenue Law Reporter 59., this ground is not tenable. In this situation, the only ground available to the department was that the return had not been furnished in time as required by section 10(3) of the Act and, therefore, a default had been committed within the meaning of section 7(4) of the Act. This ground itself would have been sufficient provided an alternative punishment was not provided under section 10(6) of the Act. The punishment provided thereunder is that, in case of delayed submission of returns, penalty to the extent of one and a half times of the amount of sales tax can be levied in addition to the sales tax. The departmental authorities may have chosen to act under this provision and not u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X