Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P. LKO. versus S/S NEW UNIVERSAL TANNERIES

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lko. v. S/S New Universal Tanneries - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 770 of 1999 [2006] RD-AH 5465 (7 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.770 OF 1999

The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow.          ....Applicant

Versus

S/S New Universal Tanneries, Jajmau, Kanpur.   .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 15.04.1999 relating to the assessment year 1988-89.

The only dispute relates to the levy of tax under section 3-AAAA of the Act. Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "Dealer") sold hide and skin within the State of U.P. against Form 3-B to the extent of Rs.19,97,981/-. Assessing authority was of the view that the purchases of hide and skin, which were sold against Form 3-B were liable to tax under section 3-AAAA of the Act. Assessing authority in the assessment order assessed the purchases, which has been estimated at Rs.10 lacs. Dealer filed first appeal before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax, Kanpur. First appeal was allowed and the tax under section 3-AAAA of the Act was deleted. Tribunal upheld the order of the first appellate authority.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that since the sales were made against Form 3-B corresponding purchases of such hide and skin is liable to tax under section 3-AAAA of the Act. I do not find any substance in the argument of learned Standing Counsel.

Section 3-AAAA of the Act reads as follows:

3-AAAA. Liability to tax on purchase of goods in certain circumstances--- Subject to the provisions of Section 3, every dealer who purchases any goods liable to tax at the point of sale to consumer--

(a) from any registered dealer in circumstances in which no tax is payable by such registered dealer, shall be liable to pay tax on the purchase price of such goods at the same rate at which but for such circumstances, tax would have been payable on the sale of such goods;

(b) from any person other than a registered dealer whether or not tax is payable by such person, shall be liable to pay tax on the purchase price of such goods at the same rate at which tax is payable on the sale of such goods:

Provided that no tax shall be leviable on the purchase price of such gods in the circumstances mentioned in clause (a) and (b), if--

(i) such goods purchased from a registered dealer have already been subjected to tax or may be subjected to tax under Section 3-AAA;

(ii) tax has already been paid in respect of such goods purchased from any person other than a registered dealer;

(iii) the purchasing dealer resells such goods within the State or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or exports bout of the territory of India, in the same form and condition in which he had purchased them;

(iv) such goods are liable to be exempted under Section 4-A of the Act.

Explanation.--For the purpose of this section and of Section 3-AAA the sale of---

(i) ginned cotton after ginning raw cotton purchased as aforesaid, or

(ii) dressed hides and skins or tanned leather after dressing or tanning raw hides and skins purchased as aforesaid, or

(iii) rice during the period commencing on September 2, 1976 and ending with April 30, 1977 after bulling paddy purchased as aforesaid,

shall be deemed to be in the same form and condition."

Proviso (iii) to section 3-AAAA of the Act says that in case if the purchasing dealer resells such goods within the State of U.P. tax is not payable under section 3-AAAA of the Act. Admittedly, hide and skin had been sold within the State of U.P. and, therefore, in view of Proviso (iii) to section 3-AAAA of the Act, tax is not payable under section 3-AAAA of the Act.

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

Dt.07.03.2006

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.