GULATI, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE petitioner is a limited company and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of vanaspati product at Sitapur. For the first quarter (April to June) of the assessment year 1972-73, the petitioner-company submitted its return through registered post on 31st July, 1972, disclosing a turnover of Rs. 1,03,94,207.94 on which a tax of Rs. 7,78,228.90 was payable. The petitioner did not deposit the admitted tax before or at the time of filing of the return but sent an application along with the return praying for two months' time for depositing the tax. The second respondent, the Sales Tax Officer, Sitapur, by his letter dated 22nd August, 1972, allowed the petitioner to deposit the admitted tax by 30th August, 1972. The petitioner deposited in two instalments a sum of Rs. 5,71,800.80 before 30th August, 1972. The balance of Rs. 2,06,428.10 was deposited by the petitioner in two instalments on 22nd September, 1972, and 29th September, 1972. The Sales Tax Officer has levied upon the petitioner a penalty of Rs. 50,000 for not depositing the sum of Rs. 2,06,428.10 within the time allowed by his order dated 16th November, 1972. This order has been challenged in this petition. The penalty has been imposed under section 15-A(1)(a) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. Under that provision, a penalty can be imposed "if the assessing authority is satisfied that any dealer has without any reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of his turnover which he was required to furnish under section 7, 7-A or 18, or has, without reasonable cause, failed to furnish it within the time allowed and in the manner prescribed". Obviously, this provision applies where a dealer fails to file the return or fails to file it within the time allowed or in the manner prescribed. It is not the case of the department that either no return had been filed or that the return filed was not in the prescribed manner. The failure to deposit the admitted tax cannot be attributed to non-filing of return. The two requirements, one of filing the return and the other of depositing the admitted tax, are distinct and separate. We have already held in Sales Tax Reference No. 264 of 1971, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. M/s. Sheo Nath Rai Kanhaiya Lal ([1973] 32 S.T.C. 436), decided on 16th March, 1973, that the failure to pay the admitted tax within the statutory period does not in any way affect the validity of the return nor does it render the return as not filed in a prescribed manner. Thus, section 15-A(1)(a) has no application to the present case and has wrongly been pressed into aid by the Sales Tax Officer.
(3.) IT was then argued by the learned standing counsel that clause (c) of section 15-A(1) would be applicable. The material portion of that provision reads : "15-A. (1) If the assessing authority is satisfied that any dealer - (a) ............ (b) ............ (c) has without reasonable cause, failed to pay, within the time allowed the tax assessed on him, he may direct that such dealer shall pay, by way of penalty ........" ;