9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (11) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1991. It related to wholesale and retail trades of mentha oil, de-menthalised oil and essential oil. The assessee had obtained form C from the department against which he had purchased essential oil. When fresh application for issue of form C was moved the department was of the view that the assessee has misused the earlier forms issued to it inasmuch as the registration certificate was not granted to it in respect of resale of essential oil. Penalty proceedings under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, were initiated for violation of the condition contained in section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. For the assessment year 1993-94 penalty of Rs. 45,217 and for the assessment year 1994-95 penalty of Rs. 72,936 was im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il was to be purchased. It is further submitted that there was violation of clause (b) of section 10 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for which the penalty was imposed under section 10-A. 5.. During argument, Sri Piyush Agrawal has produced copy of the registration certificate in form B. Perusal of it shows that it was issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Moradabad. It is specifically stated in the certificate that the certificate is being issued wholly (IKM) for wholesale and retail trades of mentha oil (de-menthalised oil) and essential oil. Not only this column No. (C) "cha" relates to details of packing material to be used in sale or resale of the goods and in this column the details given are, fibre drums, G.I. drums, polythene bags. An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation; the only question was whether after purchase, the goods he could have resold by him. In case he had used the goods for purposes other than those provided in the certificate of registration he could have been punished for violation of clause (d) of section 10 and not for violation of clause (b). Thus, at the time of purchasing the goods it cannot be said that the dealer had falsely represented that the goods of such class were covered by his certificate. There was thus no misrepresentation. In these circumstances also penalty could not have been imposed.
7.. Both the revisions are, therefore, allowed. The order passed by the Tribunal is set aside and that of the first appellate authority is restored.
Petitions allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
