9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed out to the extent that the failure must be without sufficient cause. Thus under the statute it is mens rea not to file return/pay tax without there being a bona fide reason which forms the bedrock for levying penalty/interest on the non-payment/ delayed payment. In the instant case, as revealed from the facts noted above, there was sufficient cause for not paying the tax for different periods between April 9, 1990 to April 8, 1999 which, in fact, is now covered by the eligibility certificate dated December 6, 2005. Thus, if there existed a dispute rendering non-grant of eligibility certificate which was ultimately granted from a retrospective date, the petitioner was prevented by a sufficient cause. That being so, the levying of penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1998 it was held that the petitioner-unit is involved in the manufacturing process and the matter was remanded to State Government for a fresh decision. In another petition preferred by the petitioner, i.e., M.P. No. 1359 of 1990 by order dated August 17, 1999 the respondents were directed to issue eligibility certificate. Consequent thereof, the State Government vide order dated December 6, 2005 issued certificate of eligibility for availing of the facility of deferment of payment of tax under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 in the following terms: "Certificate of eligibility for availing of the facility of deferment of payment of tax under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of ten years. The tax payable by the dealer of each year shall be paid by him as indicated below: Accounting year (financial year) Year of deposit 1. 1990-1991(with effect from April 9, 1990) 2000-2001 2. 1991-1992 2001-2002 3. 1992-1993 2002-2003 4. 1993-1994 2003-2004 5. 1994-1995 2004-2005 6. 1995-1996 2005-2006 7. 1996-1997 2006-2007 8. 1997-1998 2007-2008 9. 1998-1999 2008-2009 10. 1999-2000(up to April 8, 1999) 2009-2010 (4)(a) Fixed capital investment of the industrial units as on the date of commencement of commercial production was as under: (a) Land Rs. 30,678.00 (b) Building Rs. 67,643.00 (c) Plant and machinery (5) The dealer is registered/licensed for the manufacture, in the ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve periods from 1990 to 1999 was determined as payable under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958/Commercial Tax Act, 1994, M.P. Entry Tax Act, 1976 and under the Central Sales Tax Act and on the said tax penalty/ interest under section 26(4)(a), (b), (c) of Commercial Tax Act, 1994 [under section 17(3) and 45B(2) of Act of 1958] was determined as payable. It is the contention of the petitioner that non-payment of tax was neither wilful nor deliberate and there was sufficient cause for not paying tax as per return because of the pendency of the writ petition against nongrant of eligibility certificate which was subsequently granted on December 6, 2005 and made effective retrospectively from April 9, 1990 uptil April 8, 1999. It is accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to such return or revised return after the time prescribed therefor, fails to pay interest along with such return or revised return in accordance with the provisions of clause (a) the Commissioner may, after giving the dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard, direct him to pay in addition to the tax payable or paid and the interest payable by him, by way of penalty (a sum equal to such rate as may be notified which shall not be less than 0.5 per cent but shall not exceed 1.5 per cent per month) form the date such interest had become due to the date of its payment or to the date of order of assessment, whichever is earlier, (c) (i) a dealer fails without sufficient cause to comply with the requirement of notice issued under sub-sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 before its substitution by the Act No. 4 of 1979 held that if a dealer deposits full amount of tax due before filing of return at the regular intervals disclosing correct and complete information in return which has bearing on assessment, it would be difficult to hold that such dealer had not acted bona fide in depositing the tax due as per return so as to visit him with liability to pay interest by way of penalty on the additional amount of tax payable after the assessment is made. Thus, if there existed a dispute rendering non-grant of eligibility certificate which was ultimately granted from a retrospective date, the petitioner was prevented by a sufficient cause. That being so, the levying of penalty and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
