Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 11(4),32A,33,34,36,46

Law: Central Excise Rules, 1944

Section: 10(2)(3)

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 11(4), 32-A, 33, 34, 36 & 46---Central Excise Rules, 1944, R.10(2)(3)---Appeal to Appellate Tribunal---.Assessment of sales tax---Less payment of tax due to some miscalculation---Issuance of notice---Limitation---Final order in the case had been made after about 6 months of issuance of notice to appellant, whereas under provisions of Ss. 11(4) & 36(3) of Sales Tax Act, 1990 said order was to be made within 45 days of issuance of show-cause notice---No consequence for non-adherence of said provisions of law had been prescribed, which meant that said provisions were directory and not mandatory---Appellant had contended that specific provisions of law having not been incorporated in the show-cause notice, it could not be termed as valid and no action could be taken against appellant on the basis of said faulty show-cause notice---Contention of appellant was devoid of any legal force---Object of notice including notice contemplated under S.36 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was to afford the opportunity of hearing and defence---Form of notice had neither been prescribed under statute nor in the rules farmed thereunder---Non-mention or wrong mention of the section, did not affect the nature of the documents which was determined on the basis of their contents---Merely for the reason that sub-rules (2)&(3) of R.10 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 had not been mentioned, it was not proper to declare the notice illegal---Instead of taking into consideration technicalities, the court should look into the matter with different angles namely as to whether substantial compliance had been made, or any of the sub-rules had been omitted---In the present case no prejudice was caused to the department because the substantial compliance of the relevant rules had been made---Deputy Collector had rightly held that amount in question was recoverable---Additional tax and penalty imposed, however, was waived off. 2006 SCMR 1519; 2001 SCMR 838; 2004 PTD 714 and PTCL 199(sic) CL 803 rel. JUDGMENT ABDUS SALAM KHAWAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)/(CHAIRMAN).---Being aggrieved of the Order-in-Original No. 266 of 2002, dated 23-5-2002, this appeal has been preferred…

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