Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX, U.P., LUCKNOW versus S/S MALLA TRADING COMPANY, SISVA BAZAR, MAHARAJGANJ

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Commissioner Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow v. S/S Malla Trading Company, Sisva Bazar, Maharajganj - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 3160 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 20305 (30 November 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

By the impugned order, Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied under section 13-A (4) of the U.P. Trade Tax. When the goods were intercepted on 23rd May, 2001 by the Trade Tax Officer, Mobile Squad, along with the goods, bill nos. 1 and 2 both dated 20th January, 2001 and other documents were also available which were dated 20th May, 2001. On the basis of the discrepancy in the date of the bills, goods were seized and subsequently released on furnishing of security. In pursuance of the seizure order, penalty proceeding has been initiated. Dealer appeared before the assessing authority and explained that inadvertently in the bill nos. 1 and 2 date of 20th January, 2001 has been written by the Accountant in place of 20th May, 2001. However, the entry of the goods have been shown in the books of account. Assessing authority has not accepted the plea of the dealer and levied the penalty, which has been confirmed in first appeal. Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty order. On the facts and circumstances, Tribunal has accepted the explanation that by mistake in the bill nos. 1 and 2, date 20th January, 2001 in place of 20th May, 2001 was mentioned. Tribunal further held that the goods were found entered in the books of account. Finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact. No question of law is involved in the present revision.

In the result, revision fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dated.30.11.2006.

VS.3160/04.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.