9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. Penalty - Held that:- Mere failure to carry the prescribed declaration form duly filled in is liable for penalty as per provisions of Section 78 (5) of the RST Act, and there is no need to prove mens rea on the part of the assessee - penalty upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Tax Reference No.23/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2018 - P.K. Jaiswal And S.K. Awasthi JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Sumit Nema, learned Senior Counsel along with Shri Vibhash Khedekar, learned counsel For the Smt. Archana Kher, learned Government Advocate ORDER This petition under Section 70 (2) (b) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 has been filed against order dated 24.09.2016 (Annexure 'F') passed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Division No.3, Indore, who vide order dated 29.09.2010 (Annexure 'B') rejected the appeal. 5.The petitioner being aggrieved by common order of appeal, preferred a second appeal before the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Appellate Board, Indore. On 05.04.2016 (Annexure 'D'), the learned Appellate Board passed an order affirming penalty imposed by the learned Appellate Authority. Thereafter, an application dated 14.06.2016 (Annexure 'E') under Section 70 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 was filed by the petitioner before the learned Appellate Board, requesting to refer questions of law to the High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vy of penalty being omission leading to such re-assessment being attributable to the dealer . 8.Reliance has been placed by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner on the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Guljag Industries v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax reported in (2007) 11 STJ 361 (SC) . 9.This question will cover in Questions No.3 and 5 referred by the learned Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Appellate Board by order dated 24.09.2016. 10.As per notification dated 13.12.2004, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 17 of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 and sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, exemption was granted by the State Government in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court that mens rea is not an essential ingredient for attraction penal provisions of a Civil Act. The breach of civil obligation will immediately attract penalty irrespective of whether the contravention is with a guilty intention. Unless language of the provision intends the need to establish means rea, it is generally sufficient to prove the contravention. In the present case, out whether the assessee has contravened Section 78 (2) and not to find out evasion of tax. The said function is assigned to the Assessing Authority in assessment proceedings. In the circumstances, it is held that mens rea is not an essential ingredient for imposition of penalty under Section 78 (2). Therefore, mere failure to carry the prescribed declaration f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
