RADHAKRISHNA AND CO GANGAYAPATHI CUDDAPAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is referred to a Bench by our learned brother Seshachelapati, J., as in his opinion it involves an important point of law bearing on the interpretation of section 14 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (VI of 1957) and it is bare of authority.

(2.) The point for decision is a short one, namely, whether penalty under section 14 (2) can be levied after the best judgment assessment was made under section 14 (1). The facts relevant to this enquiry may be shortly stated. The petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on the business of manufacture of groundnut oil and cake and paddy and rice. For the assessment year 1957-58, they submitted monthly returns of their transactions. In the course of that year, a sudden inspection of the business premises led to the recovery of accounts which disclosed that the assessee suppressed a good part of the turnover. As the partnership did not disclose several taxable items in the monthly returns with the deliberate intention of evading sales-tax, the assessing authority proceeded to make the assessment to the best of his judgment under section 14 (1). After having completed the assessment, he called upon the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be levied on the turnover disclosed. The explanation furnished by the petitioner was not acceptable to the proper officer with the result that a penalty of Rs. 4,182 was levied.

(3.) The appeal carried by the petitioner to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes proved unsuccessful. A further appeal was preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal without paying the penalty imposed on him. Hence the appeal was rejected. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.