BHIM SAIN SUDARSHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of G. S. T. References Nos. 17 to 22 of 1973 as the facts of all the cases and the points involved in them are the same.

(2.) THE facts of the cases are that the firm M/s. Bhim Sain Sudarshan Kumar, the petitioner, is functioning as commission agents at Patti. It is registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the registration certificate was issued on the basis of an application dated 6th July, 1961. The petitioner was entitled to purchase paddy, kapas, gur and oilseeds for resale, according to the registration certificate issued under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Assessing Authority while inspecting the accounts of M/s. Nihal Chand and Sons, Patti, found that the petitioner had effected purchase of timber from time to time during the years 1961-62 to 1966-67 and effected sales thereof in favour of M/s. Nihal Chand and Sons, Patti. The Assessing Authority considering that the petitioner was not entitled to purchase timber on the strength of the registration certificate issued 6 notices under Section 10 (b) of the Central Sales Tax Act for the years 1961-62 to 1966-67. The Assessing Authority after hearing the petitioner imposed penalties on it in all the six cases, vide order dated 16th December, 1966. The appeals against the order of the Assessing Authority to the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner were rejected by him, vide order dated 28th March, 1968. The petitioners went up in second appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal who rejected the same, vide order dated 5th June, 1970. On application under Section 22 (1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, the Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following question for decision by this Court : That under the circumstances according to the facts found out by the Assessing Authority and the material on record along with the explanation of the petitioner-firm, has the petitioner made any false representation with any guilty intention which is an essential requisite of Section 10 (b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and is the petitioner-firm liable for penalty under Section 10a of the said Act ?

(3.) FROM the perusal of the two entries, it is evident that in the registration certificate the commodities, all foodgrains, cotton, chillies and the word "etc. " did not figure. The Assessing Authority, the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner and the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the dealer had made an untrue statement while purchasing timber on the concessional rate of tax against C forms issued by him. Consequently, they imposed penalty under Section 10a of the Central Sales Tax Act.