9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (7) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The registration was granted on April 28, 1987 but with effect from April 1, 1987. As the budgetary provisions in the financial year 1986-87 would lapse by March 31, 1987, the petitioner supplied the goods to the said District Educational Officer in the last week of March, 1987 and raised credit bills along with advance stamped receipts. The payment for the same was made by cheque dated March 31, 1987, but issued on April 5, 1987. The petitioner did not file return for March, 1987 since it bona fide thought that it can file return only for the business done after obtaining certificate of registration. Respondents 1 and 2 accompanied by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and other staff of Enforcement and Vigilance Cell, inspected the business premises of the petitioner on June 15, 1987. The petitioner gave a statement at the time of inspection that it was willing to pay tax due on the sales made by it. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 27,116 was determined as the tax and was paid by the petitioner to the respondents during inspection itself. It is alleged that the respondents coerced the petitioner t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any amount collected over and above the said amount, it is contended, is liable to be refunded. It would be appropriate to examine the provisions of section 30 which deals with offences and penalties and section 32 which deals with composition of offences. In so far, as it is relevant for the instant case, section 30(1) of the Act is extracted: "30. Offences and penalties.-(1) Any person who- (a) fails to pay within the time allowed, any tax assessed on him or any penalty levied, or any fee due from him under this Act; or (b) being a person obliged to register himself as a dealer under this Act, does not get himself so registered; or (c) wilfully acts in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder; shall, on conviction, be liable to be punished with fine which shall not be less than five hundred rupees but which may extend to two thousand rupees." and section 32 reads as under: "32. Composition of offences.-(1) The prescribed authority may accept, from any person who has committed or is reasonably suspected of having committed an offence under this Act, by way of composition of such offence- (a) where the offence consists of the failure to pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent contends that an offence punishable under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 30 viz., wilful contravention of the provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder would fall under section 32(1)(a). Non-payment of tax and evasion of tax would constitute contravention of the Act and thus squarely fall under section 32(1)(a). 9. It must be borne in mind that section 30 of the Act is a penal provision and it must, therefore, be strictly construed. Power has been conferred on the authorities to compound the offences in appropriate cases and levy compounding fee. As already noticed above, section 32(1)(a) of the Act deals with two specific offences. All other offences not falling under section 32(1)(a) which can be compounded a maximum compounding fee of Rs. 3,000 has been prescribed under the residuary clause (b) of section 32(1). If the contention of the learned Government Pleader is to be accepted then every contravention of the provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder would fall under section 32(1)(a) rendering the provisions of clause (b) of section 32(1) redundant or superfluous. Before an offence can be compounded under section 32 of the Act, there must b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sistant Commercial Tax Officer (Int.), Mahaboobnagar [1990] 10 APSTJ 23, this Court relying upon Sree Rama Trading Company case [1989] 8 APSTJ 57 held: "The notice clearly shows incorrect maintenance of accounts and evasion of tax. From the notice, it is evident that the dealers have wilfully failed to maintain true and correct accounts as required under section 25 of the Act read with rule 45 of the Rules and thus committed an offence punishable under section 30(1)(c) of the Act. Thus the main offence is one of failure to maintain true and correct accounts and, therefore, the case squarely falls under the ratio laid down by the Division Bench. In the circumstances, there shall be a direction to the respondents to collect at the rate of Rs. 1,000. The excess amount, if collected, is directed to be refunded." 14.. In P.V. Raghavulu & Co. v. Special Assistant Commercial Tax Officer [1991] 81 STC 307 (AP), it was held: "A reading of sub-section (1) shows that clause (a) is attracted only where the offence consists of the failure to pay, or evasion of tax due. In other cases, it is clause (b) that applies. In this case, as stated above, the composition amount was levied not on the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
