Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 33(2),34,37

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 33(2), 34 & 47---Fraud in payment of Sales Tax---Imposition of penalty---Appeal---Appellant company was paying fixed monthly sales tax at the rate of Rs.1,73,250 per month---Records of appellant were audited by staff of Sales Tax Collectorate and it was observed as many as eight treasury challans for eight months contained overwriting, manipulation and alteration in the figures appearing on original treasury challans---In said eight challans an amount of Rs.73,250 each challan was actually deposited, but said challans were forged to show by adding the figure of one thereby showing deposit of Rs.1,73,250 in each challan, thereby appellant defrauded public exchequer to the tune of Rs.8,00,000---Additional Collector directed appellant to deposit defrauded amount of Sales Tax along with additional tax and surcharge---Penalty of Rs.8,80,000 was also imposed on appellant under S.33(2) of Sales Tax Act, 1990---Fraud of serious nature had been committed by tampering and forging the amount deposited in National Bank of Pakistan on account of fixed monthly sales tax---Appellant had deposited principal amount of defrauded sales tax and had prayed for waiver of additional tax; surcharge and penalty on the sole ground that fraud was committed by their Munshi---Plea of appellant with regard to innocence could not be accepted as the law stipulated under S.68 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 had prescribed that where any person was expressly or impliedly authorized by a registered person to be an agent, said registered person would be responsible for the act done by his agent---Appellant company, in circumstances could not be absolved of its responsibility stipulated by the law---Since it was a matter of forgery and manipulation in the record, penalty imposed under S.33(2) of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was not harsh, but seemed to be reasonable and fair enough---Imposition of additional tax in terms of S.34 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 being directory in nature, prayer for its waiver, was not maintainable-Orders passed by competent Authorities, could not be interfered with in appeal by High Court. 2005 PTD 165 and Eastern Rice Syndicate v. Central Board of…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492