TARUN AGARWALA, J. - These six revisions filed under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") are directed against the proceedings initiated under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act for the non-deposit of the entry tax within the stipulated period.

The brief facts leading to the filing of the revisions is, that the applicant is engaged in the manufacture and sale of sugar and its bye-product. By U.P. Act No. 30 of 2007, section 4A was inserted in the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, wherein the manufacturer was authorised to collect the entry tax at the time of delivering the goods to a person. It transpires that for the month of September 2000 to February 2001, the applicant had not deposited the entry tax within the prescribed time but subsequently deposited the amount along with interest at 24 per cent per annum. However, a notice was issued by the competent authority under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act to show cause, as to why, penalty should not be imposed upon the applicant for not depositing the entry tax within the specified period.

The applicant submitted a reply and showed reasonable cause indicating that on account of financial crisis, the applicant could not deposit the admitted tax but subsequently deposited the entire amount along with interest at 24 per cent per annum. The applicant further submitted that since interest was deposited, penalty could not be imposed. The applicant further submitted that the assessing authority had not initiated any provisional assessment proceeding nor passed any provisional assessment order, and therefore, penalty proceedings under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act could not be initiated.

The Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Trade Tax, Lakhimpur Kheri after considering the matter, passed an order imposing penalty under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act for not depositing the admitted tax within the specified time. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the applicant preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. The appellate authority recorded a finding that the applicant had deposited the entire admitted tax along with interest, and therefore, partly allowed the appeal and reduced the penalty.

Being aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue Department as well as the applicant filed a second appeal before the Trade Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal, in its order, also recorded that the dealer had deposited the interest on the late deposit of the entry tax but, after considering the matter, remanded the matter back to the assessing authority for a fresh determination of penalty under section 15A(1)(a) of the Act. The applicant, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, has filed the present revision.

Heard Sri Piyush Agarwal, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjeev Shankdhar, the Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The admitted facts as called out from the record is, that the admitted tax was not deposited within the stipulated period but subsequently, the admitted tax was deposited along with interest at 24 per cent per annum. The record indicates that the delay ranged from a period of one month or four months. The cause shown for non-deposit was on account of financial crisis which the applicant underwent on account of the payment of cane dues pursuant to a recovery certificate.

Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to refer to two provisions of the Act which are relevant and germane to the present controversy, namely, section 15A(1)(a) and section 8(1) of the Act which reads as under :

"Section 15A. Penalties in certain cases. - (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 the return as requir