STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAMSINGH PANWALA JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE circumstances giving rise to this revision petition on behalf of the State of Rajasthan against the order of Dy. Commissioner, Appeals, Jaipur dated 10. 1. 64 are as under : - THE Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Jaipur as per his assessment order dated 6. 8. 63 estimated the G. T. O. of the non-applicant at Rs. 11,100/- and taxable turnover at Rs. 5500/- in respect of Pan (Betel leaves ). THE non-applicant had not filed any return nor paid tax for the period under assessment (1962-63) and no account books of the sales were maintained in spite of instructions. THE Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) in appeal filed by the non-applicant held that in the year under assessment the appellant was not a registered dealer and a non-registered dealer cannot be charged to tax. He accepted the appeal and set aside the order of Asstt. Sales Tax Officer, Jaipur. Aggrieved by this order, the State has come in revision.

(2.) I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. The learned counsel for the State contended that no notice under rule 35 (1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules was given by the lower appellate court and further argued that the non-applicant was under statutory obligation to set his registration renewed and on his failure to do so he was liable to penalty u/s 16 (1) (a) of the Sales Tax Act and that he was also liable to pay tax as per Sec. 3 (1) of the Act. He contended that the non-applicant is a manufacturer is goods and liable to pay tax on the turnover of Rs. 5000/- & more. Referring to Sec. 7 of the Act as it stood previously the learned counsel contended that for the period in question it was imperative to have submitted the returns even though the non-applicant was not registered.