Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


M/S Alankrit Forma v. Commissioner Trade Tax, U.P. Lko. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 113 of 2000 [2006] RD-AH 6536 (24 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).




M/s Alankrit Forma, 74/71, Tula Ram Bagh,

through its Proprietor, Shri Vinay Kumar.           .Applicant


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 26.11.1999 for the assessment year 1995-96.

Applicant was carrying on the business of medicines and had made purchases within the State of U.P. and outside the U.P. and in respect of which maintained books of account. Applicant had disclosed the taxable turn over at Rs.43,048/-. Assessing authority had rejected the books of account and estimated the taxable turn over at Rs.5 lacs. Order of the assessing authority has been upheld in first appeal. Applicant filed second appeal before the Tribunal.  Tribunal has rejected the books of account but reduced the taxable turn over to Rs.4 lacs. Tribunal has rejected the books of account mainly on the ground that the applicant had imported the medicines outside the State of U.P. without Form-31. Freight and expenses had not been included in the purchases. The returns were not filed in specified time as against the closing stock of Rs.4,34,000/- and goods were insured for Rs.2 lacs only.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the ground taken by the Tribunal are not the valid ground for the rejection of books of account and do not lead to the suppression of the turn over. He submitted that the individual purchase from outside the State of U.P. was less than Rs.5,000/-, therefore, import was made without the Form-31. He submitted that the entire purchases made from outside the State of U.P. have been disclosed in the books of account and at no stage applicant was found importing the goods in an attempt to evade the tax. He further submitted that insurance for only Ex-U.P. goods was taken and not for the U.P. goods. He further submitted that the freight was shown alongwith bank charges in the books of account. Learned Standing Counsel relied upon the order of the Tribunal.

I find substance in the argument of learned counsel for the applicant. Rejection of books of account is based on irrelevant consideration without pointing out any defect in the books of account and any material of suppression. Grounds referred in the order do not leads to the suppression of the turn over.

In the result, revision is allowed and the books of account and disclosed turn over is accepted. Order of the Tribunal is set aside. Tribunal is directed to pass order under section 11 (8) of the Act.




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


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 |

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