R.R. Misra, J. - (1.) By means of this revision the assessee has assailed the order dated 27th March, 1985 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal.
(2.) The assessee in the assessment year 1978-79, dealt with in bardana. In their return they disclosed taxable sale of Rs. 1,14,992 on which they admitted their tax liability at Rs. 5,750. The assessing authority accepted the book version of the turnover shown by the assessee. Since the assessee did not pay the admitted tax within the prescribed time, the Sales Tax Officer concerned calculated interest at the rate of 5 per cent per month with effect from 1st April, 1979, till the date of payment. Although the account books were accepted by the Sales Tax Officer yet the assessee filed a first appeal against the amount of interest which the Sales Tax Officer calculated against the assessee. The said appeal was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial). Aggrieved against the same, the Commissioner of Sales Tax preferred a second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal which has been allowed by the impugned order. The Tribunal has set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) and restored the order passed by the assessing authority. It further directed that if the assessee had not deposited the admitted tax, the same shall be realised from the assessee. Learned counsel for the assessee has assailed the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal in this Court.
(3.) A preliminary objection has been taken by the learned Standing Counsel that under the law no appeal lay to the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) against the calculation of interest made by the Sales Tax Officer under Section 8(1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). This objection is sought to be met by the learned counsel for the assessee on the ground that the interest accrued in the present case is a part of the tax assessed by the Sales Tax Officer by virtue of Sub-section (1-C) of Section 8 of the Act. The learned Standing Counsel in reply submits that under Section 9 of the Act an appeal lies against a person aggrieved by an order made by the assessing authority. He further contends that having regard to the facts of the present case, the demand of interest as made by the Sales Tax Officer does not amount to an "order" made by the assessing authority against whom an appeal lies. These rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, therefore, lead me to examine as to how the interest in question is charged from the standpoint of the Act and under what circumstances it is charged. The further scope of scrutiny will be as to what is the nature of such interest and whether an order is necessary for the charging of the interest, and ultimately whether an appeal lies against the charge of interest in question and, if so, its effect.;