Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Vijay and Company - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSales Tax Revision No. 240 of 1979
Judge
Reported in[1980]45STC161(All)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentVijay and Company
Advocates:Standing Counsel
DispositionPetition dismissed
Excerpt:
- - the revising authority has taken the view that although interest becomes a part of the tax under section 8(1-c), the requirements of section 9(l)(a), which applies in the present case, are met in case the assessee deposits the tax admitted by him in his returns or before the assessing authority, and the failure to deposit the interest on the tax is not fatal to the entertainability of the appeal. 130. in none of those cases, it has been held that not only the tax admitted by the assessee in his returns has to be deposited, but also the interest that may have fallen due thereon, on account of failure to deposit the tax within time......act on the turnover of sales or purchases, as the case may be, admitted by the appellant in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this act, whichever is greater.5. in the present case, the assessee had filed all the returns and, as such, section 9(1)(a) applies to the case. as i read section 9(1)(a), all that is required is that the assessee should deposit the amount of tax or fee admitted by him in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceeding under the act, whichever is greater. in the case of kanpur vanaspati stores, kanpur v. commissioner of sales tax, uttar pradesh 1973 u.p.t.c. 685 (s.c.), the supreme court held that the assessee had to deposit the tax admitted by him to be due in his returns or before the assessing authority. in this.....
Judgment:

C.S.P. Singh, J.

1. The assessee filed an appeal, which was dismissed on the ground that the admitted amount of tax had not been deposited. The view taken that the amount of tax had not been paid was based on the consideration that although the assessee had paid the tax admitted by him, but not the interest due thereon. The revising authority has taken the view that although interest becomes a part of the tax under Section 8(1-C), the requirements of Section 9(l)(a), which applies in the present case, are met in case the assessee deposits the tax admitted by him in his returns or before the assessing authority, and the failure to deposit the interest on the tax is not fatal to the entertainability of the appeal.

2. The view taken by the revising authority appears to be correct. Sri V.D. Singh, appearing on behalf of the department, strenuously contended that the tax, which has to be deposited by an assessee before filing an appeal is an amount which is equal to the tax plus interest accrued thereon. In support of this contention, he drew my attention to Section 8(1) and 8(1-C). These provisions may be extracted:

8. (1) The tax admittedly payable shall be deposited within the time prescribed or by the thirty-first day of August, 1975, whichever is later, failing which simple interest at the rate of 2 per cent for every month or part thereof shall become due and be payable on the unpaid amount with effect from the day immediately following the last date prescribed or with effect from the first day of June, 1975, whichever is later and nothing contained in Section 7 shall prevent or have the effect of postponing the liability to pay such interest.

3. Explanation. -- For the purposes of this sub-section, the tax admittedly payable means the tax which is payable under this Act on the turnover of sales or, as the case may be, the turnover of purchases, or of both, as disclosed in the accounts maintained by the dealer, or admitted by him in any return or proceeding under this Act, whichever is greater, or, if no accounts were maintained, then according to the estimate of the dealer.'

(1-C) The amount of interest payable under Sub-sections (1) and (2) shall be without prejudice to any other liability or penalty that the dealer may incur under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, and shall be added to this amount of tax and be also deemed for all purposes to be part of the tax.

4. A reading of these provisions undoubtedly makes the interest that has accrued on the tax due a part of the tax, which the assessee has to pay. But the entertainability of an appeal under Section 9 has to be determined by reference to that section, and not Section 8 of the Act. Section 9(1)(a) reads as under:

(1)(a) Where all the returns for the assessment year have been filed, the amount of tax or fee due under this Act on the turnover of sales or purchases, as the case may be, admitted by the appellant in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this Act, whichever is greater.

5. In the present case, the assessee had filed all the returns and, as such, Section 9(1)(a) applies to the case. As I read Section 9(1)(a), all that is required is that the assessee should deposit the amount of tax or fee admitted by him in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceeding under the Act, whichever is greater. In the case of Kanpur Vanaspati Stores, Kanpur v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh 1973 U.P.T.C. 685 (S.C.), the Supreme Court held that the assessee had to deposit the tax admitted by him to be due in his returns or before the assessing authority. In this view of the matter, it is not possible to accept the contention that the assessee had to deposit not only the tax that is admitted by him in his returns, but also any interest that may have fallen due thereon. My attention was drawn to two decisions of this Court, Kanpur Vanaspati Stores, Kanpur v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh [1969] 23 S.T.C. 62 (All.), and Ramnath Dubey v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh [1972] 29 S.T.C. 130. In none of those cases, it has been held that not only the tax admitted by the assessee in his returns has to be deposited, but also the interest that may have fallen due thereon, on account of failure to deposit the tax within time. The contention raised is not supported by the language of Section 9(1)(a) and cannot be accepted.

The revision fails and is dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //