Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

UNION OF INDIA versus COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Union Of India v. Commissioner, Trade Tax - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 186 of 1998 [2006] RD-AH 2890 (7 February 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

Court no. 55

Trade Tax Revision no.  (186) Of 1998.

The Union of India, through the General Manager, Ghazipur... Applicant.

Vs

The Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow. ...Opp. Party.

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act') is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 25.11.1997 relating to assessment year 1979-80 under the U. P. Trade Tax Act.

Applicant claimed to be one of the Department of Ministry of Finance, Union of India engaged in the activity of production, sale and distribution of Opium. under the N. D. P. S. Act, 1985 and Opium Act, 1857, Opium Act,1978 and Dangerous Drug Act,1930.  Claim of applicant is that it used to give advance payments to the farmers for production of Opium and when final accounting was made, purchases were incorporated in the books of account.  It was claimed that after the final accounting, purchases of Rs.6,52,96,042.75 was incorporated in the books of account, in the month of February, 1980 and on which, tax at Rs.84,88,485.55 was paid on 10.03.1980.  The Assessing Authority demanded interest at Rs.15,84,517.10 treating the entire purchases to have been made in the month of April, 1979 and the amount of tax should have been deposited in the month of May, 1979 while  it was deposited in the month of March, 1980.  Applicant filed appeal.  The Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and remanded back the matter to the Assessing Authority with the direction to find out as to when the purchases were made and when tax was due.  In the remand proceedings, applicant furnished details of payments made in various months to the farmers and submitted that the final accounting to the farmers were made in the month of February, 1980 and accordingly purchases at Rs. 6,52,96,042.75 was incorporated in the books of account and tax was deposited on 10.3.1980 within time, thus no interest could be demanded.  Assessing Authority had however, not accepted the plea of the applicant and had raised demand of Rs.15,84,517.10 treating the entire purchases to have been made in the month of April, 1979.  Order of the Assessing Authority has been upheld in First Appeal as well as by the Tribunal.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the Tribunal has not adjudicated the real issue involved in the present case and claim of the applicant that the purchases were made in the month of February, 1980 when the final accounting was made and the purchases were incorporated in the books of account.  He submitted that the applicant had made advance payments to the farmers for purchasing Opium and on the supply of Opium, final accounting was made in the month of February, 1980 then the purchases were incorporated in the books of account and accordingly tax was deposited within time.  Learned Standing Counsel also not disputed that the Tribunal has not decided the real issue.  

I have perused the order of the Tribunal and the authorities below.  Tribunal has not decided the real issue involved in the case, which is stated earlier.  Thus, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh.  Tribunal is directed to examine the claim of the applicant that the actual purchases were made in the month of February, 1980 and accordingly tax was deposited within time, therefore, the interest could not be demanded.

In the result, revision is allowed.  Order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh in the light of observations made above.  The Tribunal is also directed to decide the appeal expeditiously.

Dt:07.02.2006.

MZ/-


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.