The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of Section 11(c) of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962, requiring the appellant to file proof of having paid 50% of the penalty levied when appealing against the imposition of penalty, and the importance of filing an appeal within the prescribed time with sufficient cause for any delay.

1. The facts that have given rise to this appeal are that the appellant, a dealer purchased tiles from the consigner M/s Evita Tiles Lt., against C-Form No. 02V830892, during the period commencing from 17-6-2000 to 28-08-2000, and availed concessional rate of tax against the purchases. The perusal of the registration certificate of the appellant revealed that he was not registered for the purchase of the tiles during the period stated above but was registered as such w.e.f. 07-09-2000 only. All the purchases made by the appellant were thus unauthorized as per the status of his certificate of registration. He also contravened the tenets of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 by the issuance of aforementioned C-Forms. The Assessing Authority vide his order dated 11-01-2010 held the appellant liable to penalty to the tune of RS. 37,718.10 under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. This order of the Assessing Authority was assailed by the appellant in an appeal before the Dy. Commissioner, Sales Tax (Appeals), who vide order dated 18-12-2010 dismissed the appeal of the appellant summarily on the grounds that the appeal is time barred and that the appellant has failed to comply with the terms of clause (c) of the 2nd proviso to Section 11 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962.

2. The appellant has, in his appeal filed before this Tribunal, assailed the order of the Dy. Commissioner, Commmercial Taxes (Appeals), Jammu interalia on the grounds that the reasons for delay in filing the appeal were explained by him and he had sought time from Dy. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Jammu, for getting stay from Ld. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Jammu but to his dismay the said Authority dismissed his appeal for want of filing the proof of payment of 50% of penalty imposed on him

3. I have heard the arguments advanced at the bar and I have given my thoughtful consideration to the material on record.

4. What requires consideration is to see whether the order of the Appellate Authority can be maintained on the reasoning projected therein, i.e. whether the appellant was obliged to file proof of payment of 50% of the penalty imposed on him by the Assessing Authority, as per the requirement of clause (c) of the 2nd proviso to Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962. In order to have a proper understanding of the matter it will be appropriate to reproduce the relevant excerpts of the proviso added to Section 11 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962, herein below:-

"Section 11:-..Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained by the said authority unless it is satisfied that:-

(a) where all the returns for a year have been filed, the amount of tax due under this Act on the turnover of sales or purchases, as the case may be, admitted by the appellant in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this Act, whichever is higher, has been paid; or

(b) Where some of the returns for a year have not been filed or no return has been filed for such year, the amount of tax due under this Act, admitted by the appellant in the returns, if any, filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this Act or 20% of the amount of tax assessed, whichever is higher, has been paid; or

(c) in case the appeal is against the imposition of penalty, 50% of the penalty levied has been paid; [Provided that the Appellate Authority may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, stay the recovery of the disputed amount of tax and penalty. However, the stay will not cover the amount of tax and penalty payable under clauses (a), (b) and of the 2nd Proviso]

Explanation:- Nothing in this sub-section shall apply to the cases where the Commissioner in exercise of the powers vested under Section 8 makes an order extending the date of payment.

5. From the perusal of the Section 11 Supra, what comes to the fore is that the payment of 50% of the penalty, where the appeal is against the order of imposition of penalt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document