Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S KISHAN LAL MAHESH CHAND, PATEHPUR versus THE COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Kishan Lal Mahesh Chand, Patehpur v. The Commissioner Of Trade Tax, Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 621 of 1999 [2006] RD-AH 4976 (2 March 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.(621) OF 1999

M/s Kishan Lal Mahesh Chand, Agra.         ....Applicant

Versus

The Commissioner of Trade Tax U.P. at Lucknow.   .Opp.party

***************

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present revision under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 15.07.1999 relating to the assessment year 1986-87.

The dispute relates to the levy of tax on the alleged purchases of food grains worth Rs.2,20,917.72p. and oil seeds worth Rs.1,80,221.25p. claimed to have been made in purchasing commission agency for and on behalf of Ex-U.P. Principal. Claim of the applicant has been rejected  as no evidence had been adduced to prove that the purchases were made on behalf of Ex-U.P. Principal on their instructions and thereafter, goods were despatched outside the State of U.P. at the destination of Ex-U.P. Principal. Tribunal has affirmed the order of the assessing authority and first appellate authority. Tribunal held that no details of the goods was furnished and the purchase order and detailes of goods do not commensurate to each other.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

I do not find any illegality in the order of the Tribunal. Before this Court also learned counsel for the applicant failed to give the details of the goods and failed to give the details of the order of the Ex-U.P. Principal, the purchases and the dispatches of the goods at the destination of the Ex-U.P. Principal. In the absence of such material, claim of the applicant of inter-State purchases has rightly been rejected.

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

Dt.02.03.2006

R./


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.