Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) The applicant, a public limited company having its registered office at Sikandrabad, being a new industrial unit was granted eligibility certificate/exemption certificate under Section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, for the period of 6 years from February 3, 1986 to February 2, 1992. Consequently it became liable for payment of tax for the first time for the month of February, 1992 after February 2, 1992. Monthly returns for the month of February, 1992 were due and could have been filed by March 20, 1992 for U.P. and Central sales were filed on March 24, 1992 along with challans and cheque No. 443926 dated March 21, 1992. Non-filing of the returns for U.P. and Central by March 20, 1992 inspired the department to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 15-A(1)(a) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. In reply to the show cause notice it was submitted that the applicant's executive who was dealing with the sales tax matter was under bona fide belief that the return along with the tax can be deposited by the end of the succeeding month. The explanation furnished by the applicant was not accepted by the assessing officer and he imposed penalty under the aforesaid section by the order dated March 31, 1992. For the month of February, 1992 in respect of U.P. sales the penalty was levied at Rs. 56,728 and for the same period in respect of Central sales it was levied to the tune of Rs. 1,23,607. The said penalty orders were confirmed by the first appellate authority by the common order dated November 19, 1992. The quantum of penalty was reduced by the Tribunal by the common order dated April 13, 1994. Still aggrieved the present revisions have been filed by the dealer.
(2.) Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the memos of revisions the following questions have been framed : "(a) Whether the cheque having been admitted encashed on April 2, 1992 it shall relate back to the date of presentation of the cheque to the Sales Tax Officer (which happened to be March 23, 1992) and March 22, 1992 being Sunday and March 21, 1992 being half working day of the Bank the delay in depositing tax was therefore on account of reasonable cause and the Tribunal has overlooked this aspect of the matter ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in view of Rule 48 the amount can be deposited by cheque and the same was duly deposited by the applicant on March 24, 1992 after getting it endorsement on the said cheque by the Sales Tax Officer on March 23, 1992, March 22, 1992 being Sunday hence no penalty could have legally been imposed under Section 15-A(1)(a) of the Act? (c) Whether in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the delay of two days cannot be said to be without reasonable cause and once cheque is encashed it shall relate back to the date of payment, hence no penalty can be legally imposed ?"
(3.) Section 15-A(1)(a) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act reads as follows : "(1) If the assessing authority is satisfied that any dealer or other person- (a) has without reasonable cause, failed to furnish the return of his turnover or to furnish it within the time allowed and in the manner prescribed, or to deposit the tax due under this Act before furnishing the return or along with return, as required under the provisions of this Act.";