( 1 ) PETITIONER is a dealer registered under the Delhi Sales-tax Act, 1975 (in short the act ), and the Central Sales-tax Act, 1956 (in short the central Act ). Penalty was levied on it for late filing of returns for the month of February, 19 under the aforesaid Acts. Such imposition was affirmed by Additional Commissioner of Sales-tax III (Revision ). Such levy is challenged in this petition.

( 2 ) BRIEF reference to the factual aspects would be necessary for adjudication of the issues involved. An application was filed under Rule 48 of the Delhi Sales-tax Rules, 1975 (for short the rules ) before the Commissioner of Sales-tax, Delhi (in short the commissioner ) praying for extension of time to pay the tax due for the month of February, 1996. Prayer was made for grant of time till 31st March, 1996. Commissioner granted extension of time for payment of tax by order dated 22nd March, 1996 upto 25th March, 1996. Order passed by the Commissioner reads as follows :

"they may pay February tax (Rs. 13. 62 lacs) by 25th March, 1996 and advance tax for March by 27th March. "in reality payment for February, 1996 was made on 30th March, 1996. Sales-tax Officer initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty on the ground that tax was not paid within the time permitted. Considering the quantum of tax involved, i. e. Rs. l,47,853. 00, and Rs. 12,15,130. 00 under the State and the Central Acts respectively, penalties of Rs. 50,000. 00, and Rs. 4,00,000. 00 respectively were imposed. It is to be noted that in response to the notices issued petitioner took a stand that there was a small delay in making the payment and in fact before the expiry of the financial year the payments have been made. Petitioner also took the stand that on account of financial stringencies the payments could not be made by the time stipulated by the Commissioner. This explanation did not find acceptance by the Sales-tax Officer who passed orders holding that the explanation was not satisfactory and levy of penalty was called for. Order as recorded in the order-sheet reads as follows:

"inspite of the extension given by the learned Commissioner, Sales-tax to pay tax for the month of Feb. , 19% by 25th March, 1996, he failed to comply with the orders of Hon ble Commissioner, Sales-tax and paid the tax on 30. 3. 1996. The dealer failed to deposit advance tax for the month of March, 1996 by the stipulated time as ordered by the Hon ble Commissioner, Sales-tax. Since the tax has been paid late and return also filed late, i. e. on 30. 3. 1996, the interest for late payment of tax will be charged at the time of assessment but penalty for late filing of return is imposed after considering the reason in the reply. A penalty of Rs. 50,000. 00 (Rupees fifty thousand only) under local Act and Rs. 4,00,000. 00 (Rupees four lacs only), under the Central Act is imposed. "but orders communicated were in cyclostyled forms about which we shall deal later on. Revisions filed under Section 47 of the Act and under Section 9 (2) of the Central Act did not bring any relief to the petitioner. Revisional Authority was of the view that since amounts have been collected from the parties, there was no scope for taking the stand that financial stringencies were there.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Sales-tax Officer did not consider the explanation offered and merely stating that the explanation was not satisfactory, levied penalty. He also took into account non-deposit of advance tax as directed by Commissioner to be a factor to levy penalty. These according to him shows non-application of mind, and/or consideration of irrelevant materials. It is additionally pleaded that the Authorities have taken a very serious note because Commissioner s direction to pay tax for the month of March, 1996 was not complied with. Revisional Authority fell into errors by holding that tax having been collected from the customers there was no question of any grant of ti