9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation Act, 2000, for its disposal. 2.. The revision, preferred under section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, is directed against order dated November 25, 1991, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haldwani in S.A. Nos. 111 of 1991 and 146 of 1991, whereby the appeal of the assessee was allowed and the appeal of the revenue was dismissed. 3.. The question of law involved in this revision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 4-A of the aforesaid Act. As such, it was exempted from the tax for the impugned assessment years. There is no dispute that he did not pay any tax for the assessment year, yet it issued form IIIC(2) to the purchaser of his rice, which means that he gave a declaration of the purchaser that he had actually paid the tax. In this connection, it is further argued that the revisionist was righ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere was no mens rea on the part of the assessee, as such, the learned Tribunal has rightly set aside the penalty imposed against him. Had there been a case where the eligibility certificate under section 4-A was issued at late stage and meanwhile the assessee had used the form IIIC(2), obtained from the department, it could have been said that there was no mens rea on his part. However, in the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had not paid the tax as such using form IIIC(2) was an offence which attracted penalty under section 15-A(1)(l). 8.. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the learned Sales Tax Tribunal has erred in law by setting aside the penalty. As such, the revision deserves to be allowed. And the same is allowed. Question of law as mentioned above is answered in favour of the Revenue. Impugned ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
