9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed is invoking the provisions under Section 15(4) of the A.P.G.S.T. Act. The proviso to the said Section clearly indicates that before passing of an order of penalty, the authority concerned is required to issue a notice to the assessee seeking his explanation as to the cause which led to the delayed payment of tax. The very insertion of the aforesaid Section 15(4) pre-supposes that upon a notice being issued before penalty orders are passed, if the assessee was able to provide plausible and justifiable reasons which led to the delayed payment of tax it would be then within the discretion of the authority to decide whether penalty at all is to be levied. The petitioners failed to make out any case warranting interference of this Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any engaged in manufacturer of Cement and is registered under the provisions of APGST Act, 1957 and also CST Act, 1956 and they is assesee on the rolls of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Nalgonda division, Nalgonda. The respondent filed monthly return of it s business turnover for the month of June, 2022 as required under Rule 17 of APGST Rules disclosing tax liability of Rs. 1,37,74,886/- without any proof of payment of tax. It appears that the respondent paid the tax with delay along with interest. 7. The Assessing Authority issued a penalty notice, dated 22.06.2002 under section 15(4) of APGST Act, 1957 for delayed payment of tax for the months of May, 2002 to October, 2002. The respondent submitted it s reply, dated 03.07.2002 to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 09.01.2004, thereby setting aside the order of Appellate Deputy Commissioner and restored the original penalty proceedings of Assessing Authority. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), dated 09.01.2004, the respondent filed appeal before Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal vide T.A.No.375/2004. The Appellate Tribunal has considered the contention of the respondent as well as the petitioner herein and by a detailed order dated 29.01.2007 allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein. 11. During the course of hearing, Senior Standing Counsel for petitioner contended that the assessee never followed the provisions of the Act and never paid the taxes within the specified time for the period from May, 2002 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner to interfere with the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. He further contended that respondent was regular in payment of tax and was also issued Gold-card by the Commissioner for Commercial Taxes on 12.06.2002, however, owing to financial difficulties, there was delay in payment of tax for the particular period which is un intended, but the tax was paid along with interest for the delayed period. 14. He further contended that the respondent had approached the Corporate Debt Restructuring Cell for restructuring of it s debts and the lenders/financial institutions/banks have worked out restructuring packages to salvage the deteriorating situation and to pull-up the respondent company from the brink of financial cris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in 27 APSTJ 113 , in the last cited case, it was also observed that the provisions of Section 15(4) of the APGST Act are not mandatory and it cannot be said that penalty under section 15(4) should follow-up automatically, irrespective of the circumstances of the case even in case the assessee is able to furnish valid reasons for his failure to pay tax along with the returns. 17. Further, the Appellate Tribunal had referred to both factual and legal aspects, recorded elaborate reasons while allowing the appeal and also referred and relied upon various judgments for its conclusion. The Appellate Tribunal had also discussed the purport of Sections 15(4), 16(3) of APGST Act and also Sub-rule (2) of Rule 17-F of APGST Rules and finally ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ention. 20. Another fact which needs consideration is the fact that penalty imposed is invoking the provisions under Section 15(4) of the A.P.G.S.T. Act. The proviso to the said Section clearly indicates that before passing of an order of penalty, the authority concerned is required to issue a notice to the assessee seeking his explanation as to the cause which led to the delayed payment of tax. The very insertion of the aforesaid Section 15(4) pre-supposes that upon a notice being issued before penalty orders are passed, if the assessee was able to provide plausible and justifiable reasons which led to the delayed payment of tax it would be then within the discretion of the authority to decide whether penalty at all is to be levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
