OM PARKASH RAJINDER KUMAR Vs. K K OPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Full Bench is called upon to answer the following question: "can penalty be imposed on a dealer under Section 10 (7) of the Punjab general Sales Tax Act before the end of the year. "

(2.) THE circumstances which have led to the making of this reference may first be surveyed. The petitioner, a partnership firm of Amritsar, is a registered dealer under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 46 of 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act ). Shri K. K. Opal, Excise and Taxation Officer (Enforcement), hereinafter called the respondent, was appointed the assessing authority under Act for the whole of the State of Punjab by notification dated February 10, 1964 (Annexure B ). His authority and jurisdiction to exercise all the powers and to perform all the functions of assessing authority under the Act vis-avis the petitioner have not been questioned before us. Several points originally raised in the writ petition based on the alleged attack on the authority and jurisdiction of the respondent have been specifically given up by shri Bhagirth Dass, learned counsel for the petitioner at the hearing of this case.

(3.) THE petitioner was required to file quarterly returns under the Act. During the year 1964-65 when the petitioner had filed the prescribed returns for the first quarter ending June 30. 1964, but had not yet submitted the returns for the next quarter, for which the Act gave him time till October 30, 1964, the respondent served upon the petitioner the impugned notice dated October 17 1964 (Annexure c) under Sub-section (7) of Section 10 of the Act calling upon the petitioner to appear before the respondent and to show cause to him on October 29, 1964, why penalty, not exceeding one and a half time of the amount of tax to which the petitioner was liable to be assessed, should not be imposed upon the petitioner-