VIJAY PRAKASH GAUR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has been convicted under section 14 of the Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default to undergo R.I. for three months. The order was confirmed in appeal.

(2.) THE applicant is a partner and manager of the firm, M/s. Satya Prakash Rajesh Kumar, which was assessed to sales tax over Rs. 36,000 for the year 1967-68. He had not deposited the tax in spite of notice. He was, therefore, prosecuted under section 14 of the Act.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the judgment in the case of Hira Lal v. State ([1955] 6 S.T.C. 662; 1955 A.L.J. 813.) was based on certain observations made in a Division Bench case, State v. Basdeo (A.I.R. 1951 All. 44.), which was a case under the Defence of India Rules and in which the observations were that a partnership-firm is not a juristic person. He has referred to a subsequent Supreme Court decision in the case of State of Punjab v. Jullundur Vegetables Syndicate ([1966] 17 S.T.C. 326 (S.C.)), in which it was observed :