Skip to content


In Re: L.N. Abdul Sathar Sahib - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1943Mad128; (1942)2MLJ790
AppellantIn Re: L.N. Abdul Sathar Sahib
Cases ReferredHaluman Sah v. Motihari Municipality
Excerpt:
- - 1. the petitioner has been convicted on his own plea of 'guilty' of an offence punishable under section 15 of the madras general sales tax act, in respect of his failure to pay the tax due from him within the time allowed......sales tax act, in respect of his failure to pay the tax due from him within the time allowed. the learned magistrate sentenced him to pay a fine of rs. 50 with simple imprisonment for one month in default of payment and at the same time he was directed to pay a fine of rs. 5 for every day of default with effect from 28th may, 1941, the date fixed by the magistrate for the payment of the tax. the petitioner's contention is that the section confers no power on the magistrate to impose a fine in anticipation of an offence being committed although he has jurisdiction to calculate the fine payable for a particular offence on the basis of a daily penalty. in support of this argument the petitioner's learned advocate relies on the decision in haluman sah v. motihari municipality :.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Byers, J.

1. The petitioner has been convicted on his own plea of 'guilty' of an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, in respect of his failure to pay the tax due from him within the time allowed. The learned Magistrate sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 50 with simple imprisonment for one month in default of payment and at the same time he was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5 for every day of default with effect from 28th May, 1941, the date fixed by the Magistrate for the payment of the tax. The petitioner's contention is that the section confers no power on the Magistrate to impose a fine in anticipation of an offence being committed although he has jurisdiction to calculate the fine payable for a particular offence on the basis of a daily penalty. In support of this argument the petitioner's learned advocate relies on the decision in Haluman Sah v. Motihari Municipality : AIR1937Pat352 . In that case an accused was ordered to pay a fine of one rupee per day until the offending encroachment in respect of which he had been convicted, was removed. Although the learned Public Prosecutor has attempted to support the order, he has been unable to cite any authority which runs contrary to the view expressed by Agarwala, J., in the case referred to. I agree with the petitioner's learned advocate that there is no power to impose a fine in anticipation of an offence being committed. In the result the petition is allowed and that part of the order which relates to the imposition of the line at the rate of Rs. 5 per day of default is set aside.


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