9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sales Tax Act, 1963 for the year 1992-93. The petitioner was engaged in execution of works contract. During the year 1992-93 the petitioner received an amount of Rs. 15,36,875.70 from UTI for the work executed for them. When the Intelligence Officer of sales tax called for and examined accounts, he found omission to return the turnover and pay the tax by the petitioner during the year 1992-93. How ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there is only technical violation of rule 8(4)(c) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963 on the part of the petitioner inasmuch as he has paid the tax in the succeeding year as against demand of tax based on progressive billing and receipt of amounts. The Government Pleader on the other hand contended that the payment of tax is after verification of accounts by the Intelligence Officer a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amely, UTI, are also not available. Even though there is a statement in Commissioner's order that the petitioner has not remitted collected tax, the Intelligence Officer has not given any such finding in the first penalty order. In any case I find the turnover on UTI work is assessed and tax is stated to be remitted by the petitioner. The department also has not considered the circumstances un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
