Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SARVSHRI BHARTIYA KHADYA BHANDAR PIPRA ROAD, RUDRAPUR DEORIA versus THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sarvshri Bhartiya Khadya Bhandar Pipra Road, Rudrapur Deoria v. The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 159 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 5800 (9 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.159 OF 2006

Sarvshri Bhartiya Khadya Bhandar,

Pipra Road, Rudrapur, Deoria. .....Applicant

Versus

The Commissioner, 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 "Act") is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 22.06.2005 for the assessment year 2005-06 arising from the seizure proceeding under section 13-A (6) of the Act.

By the impugned order, Tribunal has fixed the security at Rs.23,200/- required to be deposited for the release of the seized goods. Tribunal has directed to furnish the security in the form of cash at Rs.11,600/- and balance amount of Rs.11,600/- in the form of Indemnity Bond.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

With the consent of both the parties, present revision is being disposed of at this stage.

Applicant is a registered dealer under U.P. Trade Tax Act. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the details on the ground of seizure at this stage, the seizure being summary proceedings, I propose to modify the order of the Tribunal to the extent that in case if the applicant furnishes the security of Rs.23,200/- in the form of other than cash and bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, seized goods shall be released forthwith. Authority concerned is directed to conclude the penalty proceeding preferably within a period of three months.

With the aforesaid observation, present revision is disposed of.

Dt.09.03.2006

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.