9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal has partly allowed the said appeal insofar as imposition of penalty under Section 12(5)(iii) of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter 'TNGST Act' for brevity) as it stood during the period in dispute i.e, 1991-92. 3. Section 12(5)(iii) of TNGST Act, 1959 reads as follows: "Section 12(5) The assessing authority may, in the order of assessment or by a separate order, direct that the dealer shall, in addition to the tax assessed under sub-section (4), pay by way of penalty, a sum - (i) which, in the case referred to in clause (i) of subsection (4) shall not be less than fifty per cent but which shall not be more than one hundred and fifty per cent of the amount of tax payable; (ii) which, in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no concealment of turnover outside the books of accounts. According to the State, the wrong reporting of taxable turnover under wrong exemption etc. it would attract penalty and hence pleaded for restoration of the order of the Assessing Officer. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent seems to be that, the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner had correctly deleted the levy of penalty and so saying, no penalty can be imposed on the amounts representing Surcharge, Additional Surcharge and Additional Sales Tax as per the decision 136 STC 606 and in turn pleded for dismissal of the State appeal. While perusing the connected records, it is seen that as per page 267 of the assessment file, the Assessing officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ows: "11. In the light of the ratio laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the decision mentioned above, we hold that cylinder delivery charges and handling/rental charges are liable to be taxed and it was rightly held by the first respondent. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the first respondent warranting our interference." 7. As far as imposition of penalty under Section 12(5)(iii) of TNGST Act is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu V. Indian Silk Traders reported in [1994] 94 STC 157 (Mad) wherein the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Cement Marketing Co. Of India Ltd. V. Assistant C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnment Pleader would submit that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 11. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the second respondent. Though the views expressed in State of Tamil Nadu V. Indian Silk Traders, (1994) 94 STC 157 are fraught with contradictions and require for a re-consideration, we are refraining from taking a different view, as the view of this Court in the aforesaid case was followed by this Court in the following cases:- i) State of Tamil Nadu vs. Periyar District Cooperative Milk Producers United Ltd., (1999) 116 STC 123; ii) State of Tamil Nadu vs. Papco Offset Printing Works, (2000) 118 STC 160 Therefore, we do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
