STATE OF U P Vs. BABU MIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are four appeals by the State. Government Appeals Nos. 44 and 45 have been filed against Babu Mian, while Government Appeals Nos. 46 and 47 have been filed against Om Prakash. All these appeals are directed against the orders of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, City Aligarh, dated the 5th October, 1963, acquitting the respondents under section 14(1)(a) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act - hereinafter called the Act. As all these appeals raise a common question of law, it will be convenient to dispose of them by a single judgment.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to these Government appeals are as follows :- In Government Appeal No. 44 of 1964, the Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh, on the 1st June, 1955, assessed the respondent to a sales tax of Rs. 67,822.00 for the assessment year 1956-57, and after deducting Rs. 384.75 P. paid by him, issued a demand notice to him for Rs. 67,437.25 P. but the respondent failed to make the payment within the time allowed. In Government Appeal No. 45 of 1964 the Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh, on the 20th September, 1961, assessed the respondent to sales tax of Rs. 48,846.44 P. for the assessment year 1958-59 and issued a demand notice for the said amount but the respondent failed to make the payment within the item allowed. In Government Appeal No. 46 of 1964 the Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh, on the 30th December, 1960, assessed the respondent to sales tax amounting Rs. 37,500 for the assessment year 1956-57, and issued a demand notice to him for that amount, but the respondent failed to make the payment within the time allowed. In Government Appeal No. 47 of 1964 the Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh, on the 30th December, 1960, assessed the respondent to sale tax in the sum of Rs. 15,626 for the assessment year 1957-58, and issued a demand notice to him for that amount, but the respondent failed to make the payment within the time allowed. Hence the Sales Tax Officer after obtaining the previous sanction of the Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P., and serving a show cause notice on the respondents, launched their prosecution under section 14(1)(a) of the Act.

(3.) ON behalf of the State it was contended, (1) that as the assessments in question were not challenged by the respondents, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Act, it was not open to them to contend that the goods in which they dealt were not liable to sales tax, and (2) and their inability to pay the tax due to their subsequent straitened circumstances could not be regarded as "reasonable cause" within the meaning of section 14(1)(a), so as to absolve them of the consequences of their failure to deposit the assessed tax within the time allowed to them for that purpose. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that both the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the State are well-founded. I shall therefore proceed at once to record my reasons for coming to that conclusion.