1994 (6) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ears prior to July 1, 1985. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, found that the assessing authority levied the penalty at three times the tax payable by the assessee on the assumption that the minimum penalty prescribed was three times the tax due and reduced it to two times. Challenging the validity of the orders of the Tribunal contending that the Tribunal erred in law, the present five .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eneral Sales Tax Act was amended on July 1, 1985, making three times as the penalty and prior thereto the minimum penalty provided was only two times." The provisions of sub-section (8) of section 14 as they stood prior to amendment by Act 18 of 1985 with effect from July 1, 1985, read as follows: "14(8). The penalty leviable under sub-section (2), sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) shall not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sure of the turnover was wilful. In these cases though it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the non-disclosure was not wilful, yet, we are unable to accept this contention as the Tribunal found that the omission was wilful. However, as the Tribunal proceeded on the assumption that minimum penalty was two times the tax due we are unable to sustain the penalty levied. But in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X