V. K. SINGHAL, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture of Rs. 45,42,416 passed Under Section 18-AA of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. Petitioner is a manufacturer of cement and provides discount, based on turnover. In the monthly returns the turnover mentioned in the invoices undergoes small reduction on account of the discount being liable to be adjusted. Even in the annual return submitted by the petitioner, the net realization of the tax have been shown. The assessing authority came to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 45,42,416 which refers to the credit notes issued after raising the invoices is the amount of tax collected for which the notice was issued and the amount was forfeited. Provisions of Section 18-AA of the Karnataka sales Tax Act, 1957 provide that where any amount is collected by way of tax or purporting to bo by way of tax from any person by any dealer in contravention of Section 18, whether knowingly or not, such dealer shall pay the entire amount so collected, to the assessing authority within twenty days after the close of the month in which such amount was collected, notwithstanding that the dealer is not liable to pay such amount as tax or that only a part of it is due from him as tax under this Act. The question is whether it results in collection of the amount. The word "collected" was interpreted by the apex Court in the case of R. S. Joshi, Sales Tax officer v, Ajit Mills Limited [1977] 40 STC 497. "what does collected mean here? Words cannot be construed effectively without reference to their context. The setting colours the sense of the word. The spirit of the provision lends force to the construction that 'collected' means 'collected and kept as his' by the trader. If the dealer merely gathered the sum by way of tax and kept it in suspense account because of dispute about taxability or was ready to return it if eventually it was not taxable, it was not collected. 'collected' in an Australian Customs Tariff Act, was held by Griffith, C. J. , not 'to include money deposited under an agreement that if it was not legally payable it will be returned': (Words and phrases p. 274 ). 'collected' in an Australian Customs Tariff Act, was held by Griffith, C. J. , not 'to include money deposited under an agreement that if it was not legally payable it will be returned': (Words and phrases p. 274 ). We therefore semanticise 'collected' not to cover amounts gathered tentatively to be given back if found non-exigible from the dealer. " ( 2 ) THE above interpretation was given of Section 37 (1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, where also the provisions were for forfeiture and in respect of any sum collected by way of tax. From the observations of the apex Court, it may be observed that every amount for which the bill is issued could not be considered to be collected. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner even before filing of the monthly statement of returns the credit was given and it is only the not amount payable after deduction of the discount remained in the sales tax account. This is a question of fact which has not been considered by the assessing authority. If merely a bill has been issued by the petitioner and thereafter before filing the monthly return the credit note has been issued then it could be considered that there was no collection of lax. In a case even where there is any mistake in the calculation of the tax, the amount raised in the bill could not be considered to be collected and the assessee has always a right to correct the mistake. It has not been found as a fact the amount for which the bill was raised was compulsorily paid by the buyer. If the credit note has been issued even before making the payment then it could not be considered to be the amount collected. In these circumstances, the order of forfeiture is quashed. The matter is sent back to the assessing authority for passing a fresh order, keeping in view the observations made above.