ORDER ABHAY M. NAIK J. - This order disposes of W.P. Nos. 259, 260 and 263 of 2006 submitted by common petitioner, namely, M/s. Vikas Enterprises, Khandwa, involving a common question of law. Reference to annexures is taken from W.P. No. 259 of 2006. All these writ petitions relate to a common period (i.e., from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997) and pertain to commercial tax, entry tax and Central sales tax, respectively. In W.P. No. 259 of 2006 an assessment order dated April 13, 2000 was passed raising a demand of commercial tax to the tune of Rs. 1,70,474 against the petitioner. In W.P. No. 260 of 2006 an assessment order dated April 13, 2000 was passed raising a demand of entry tax to the tune of Rs. 16,892 against the petitioner. In W.P. No. 263 of 2006 an assessment order dated April 13, 2000 was passed raising a demand of Central sales tax to the tune of Rs. 97,438. Revision petitions were filed in all the three cases. Madhya Pradesh Bakaya Rashi Saral Samadhan Yojna, 2002 was promulgated by the State of Madhya Pradesh on January 5, 2002. Under the scheme, it was provided that the amount of tax and penalty/interest levied under Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (Entry Tax Act) which was outstanding for payment on April 1, 2001 can be paid by making payment of 25 per cent/40 per cent of the amount of arrears. The facility granted under this Scheme was available for the arrears which were related to any year ending up to March 31, 1997. It was further provided under the scheme that no penal action against the applicant under any Act administered by the department shall be initiated after the case is disposed of under the Samadhan Scheme. Copy of the same is on record as annexure P3. Since, the case of the petitioner related to year 1996-97 and arrears outstanding was Rs. 1,70,474, the petitioner received a notice in form No. 2 whereby he was required to deposit an amount of Rs. 68,190 for settlement of arrears of Rs. 1,70,474 at 40 per cent of the arrears. The amount was duly deposited on February 7, 2002 vide annexure P6. 1,70,474, the petitioner received a notice in form No. 2 whereby he was required to deposit an amount of Rs. 68,190 for settlement of arrears of Rs. 1,70,474 at 40 per cent of the arrears. The amount was duly deposited on February 7, 2002 vide annexure P6. A certificate was granted to the petitioner in form No. 3 on April 12, 2002 wherein it was indicated that the petitioner has duly paid the arrears from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997 and there would be no penalty leviable on the petitioner. Copy of the same is on record as annexure P7. After issuance of the aforesaid certificate the petitioner withdrew his revision application as revealed in the order dated September 20, 2002 (annexure P8). Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Khandwa vide order dated December 27, 2002 (annexure P9) levied a penalty of Rs. 8,15,000 under section 69 of the Commercial Tax Act in relation to the period from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997. A revision was preferred against the same on the ground that in view of the specific provision of the said scheme no penalty could be imposed on the petitioner. Written submissions as contained in annexures P11 and P12 were also submitted. Learned revisional authority (i.e. respondent No. 2) was of the opinion that his power to levy penalty is not curtailed by the scheme. However, on merits some relief was provided by respondent No. 2 vide annexure P13 dated June 21, 2004. This petition has been preferred for quashment of annexures P9 and P13 on the ground that in view of the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Bakaya Rashi Saral Samadhan Yojna, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the Scheme"), both the orders are totally arbitrary and illegal besides being without jurisdiction. The respondents submitted the return. The impugned orders are supported on the ground that the penalty has been levied on December 27, 2002 and the same was not outstanding for payment as on April 1, 2001. Since, the order of levying penalty was passed after the cut-off date and the amount of penalty was not payable as on April 1, 2001, the petitioner is not entitled to benefit from the scheme. Heard the submissions and perused the record. Since, the order of levying penalty was passed after the cut-off date and the amount of penalty was not payable as on April 1, 2001, the petitioner is not entitled to benefit from the scheme. Heard the submissions and perused the record. The salient features of the scheme for the purpose of all the three writ petitions are as follows : (1) Scheme is known as Madhya Pradesh Bakaya Rashi Saral Samadhan Yojna, 2002. (2) Scheme shall be effective with reference to amount of tax and penalty/interest under M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976. (3) The amount must be outstanding for payment on April 1, 2001. (4) Facility of the scheme shall be available for that amount of arrears which is related to any year ending up to March 31, 1997. (5) The case of arrears shall be classified and calculation of amount to be paid for Samadhan shall be made according to the following Schedule : Schedule -------------------------------------------------------------------------- S. No. Category of the case Amount to be paid for Samadhan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) (2) (3) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Case in which the amount of 25 per cent of the amount of arrears is up to Rs. 50,000. arrears. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Case in which the amount 40 per cent of the amount of exceeds Rs. 50,000. arrears. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- (6) Application under the scheme for Samadhan for arrears may be submitted up to January 1, 2002. (7) Pendency of appeal/revision/any other proceedings before State Government Board of Revenue or other departmental authorities was to be disclosed in the application and that the same be withdrawn. (8) After the Samadhan Certificate is issued such appeal/revision/petition shall be deemed to be withdrawn automatically. (9) No penal action against the applicant under any Act administered by the department shall be initiated if the case is disposed of under the Samadhan Scheme. (10) The applicant shall also not be entitled to any other benefit under any Act afterwards. From the perusal of the record, it is clear that the assessment order contained in annexure P1 relates to the period from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997 and a demand was raised vide assessment order dated April 13, 2000 for a sum of Rs. 1,70,474. From the perusal of the record, it is clear that the assessment order contained in annexure P1 relates to the period from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997 and a demand was raised vide assessment order dated April 13, 2000 for a sum of Rs. 1,70,474. The application under the scheme in form No. 1 was duly submitted by the petitioner for settlement of his dues under the scheme. The petitioner received a notice in form No. 2 and was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 68,190 being 40 per cent of the arrears of Rs. 1,70,474. This was duly deposited on February 7, 2002 and a certificate in form No. 3 on April 12, 2002 was issued vide annexure P7. In this certificate it has been certified that the petitioner has duly deposited Rs. 68,190 out of the arrears amounting to Rs. 1,70,474 and has thus satisfied the amount of arrears. It has been clearly mentioned in the certificate, annexure P7, that no action will be initiated against the petitioner for any offence/error under the relevant Act (i.e., Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994) and no penalty would be levied under the Act against the petitioner. However, it has been clarified that the applicant would not be entitled to any other benefit on account of this certificate under any Act. On perusal of the salient features of annexure P3, it is clear that the scheme was introduced as an incentive to invite the assessees to acknowledge the liability and make payment without further inviting any action and/or penalty against them. Thus, no penal action including that of levying penalty could be taken with respect to the assessment order for the period from April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997 against the petitioner. In clause 7 of the Scheme contained in annexure P3, it has been clearly mentioned that no penal action against the applicant under any Act administered by the department shall be initiated after the case is disposed of under the Samadhan Scheme. It is amply clear that the certificate was issued vide annexure P7 on April 12, 2002 and the case of the petitioner pertaining to the year 1996-97 stood disposed of on issuance of the said certificate. It is amply clear that the certificate was issued vide annexure P7 on April 12, 2002 and the case of the petitioner pertaining to the year 1996-97 stood disposed of on issuance of the said certificate. As defined in "Black's Law Dictionary" the words "penal action" refers to a civil action, in which a wrongdoer is subject to a fine or penalty payable to the aggrieved party. Thus, levying penalty is a penal action within the meaning of clause 7 and the proceedings for penalty could not have been initiated/continued after issuance of the Samadhan Certificate dated April 12, 2002 contained in annexure P7. The plea of the respondents that the amount of penalty vide annexures P9 and P13 was levied after the cut-off date on April 1, 2001 is without any force because the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had no jurisdiction by virtue of clause 7 of the Scheme to take any penal action against the petitioner even in the nature of levying penalty, with respect to the commercial tax arrears of Rs. 1,70,474 about which the case under the scheme was disposed of and the Samadhan Certificate was duly issued. Section 69 of the Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 empowers a Commissioner or revisional authority to initiate proceedings separately for imposition of penalty if he is satisfied that a dealer has concealed his turnover or the aggregate amount of purchase prices in respect of any goods or has furnished false particulars of his sales or purchases, as the case may be. It may be seen from the impugned order, annexure P9, that the learned Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Khandwa, has not based his order on any other concealed turnover, but the same is based on a sum of Rs. 1,70,474 which has been mentioned in the Samadhan Certificate, annexure P7. So far as this amount is concerned, it has been clearly mentioned in annexure P7 that no penalty would be imposed and no action under the Act on account of any offence or error would be initiated against the petitioner. This being so, the respondents had no jurisdiction to levy penalty on the basis of the liability of Rs. 1,70,474. This order is found to be without jurisdiction. Consequently, annexure P9 as well as its modification vide annexure P13 are hereby set aside. This being so, the respondents had no jurisdiction to levy penalty on the basis of the liability of Rs. 1,70,474. This order is found to be without jurisdiction. Consequently, annexure P9 as well as its modification vide annexure P13 are hereby set aside. For the same reasonings, it is found that the respondents had no jurisdiction to levy penalty on the basis of liability of Rs. 16,892 (entry tax) and of Rs. 97,438 (Central sales tax) since the cases under the scheme were disposed of and Samadhan Certificates were duly issued in favour of the petitioner. In the results, the writ petitions are hereby allowed and the impugned orders, annexure P9 and annexure P13, in all the three writ petitions (as they are commonly numbered), are hereby quashed. No order as to costs.