Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S ASIAN P.P.G. INDUSTRIES LTD. versus THE COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Asian P.P.G. Industries Ltd. v. The Commissioner Of Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 2604 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 90 (2 January 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.2604 OF 2005

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.2605 OF 2005

M/s Asian P.P.G. Industries Ltd. ....Applicant

Versus

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

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

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

These two revisions under section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 06.12.2005 for the assessment years 2003-04  both under U.P. Trade Tax Act and Central Sales Tax.

Applicant is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of paints. Books of account have been rejected and turn over has been enhanced under U.P. Trade Tax Act. Under Central Sales Tax Act, stock transfer to the various depot have been rejected and demand of Rs.1,58,88,912/- had been created in this regard. Against the assessment orders, both under U.P. Trade Tax Act and Central Sales Tax, applicant filed appeals before Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Trade Tax, Ghaziabad alongwith applications for the stay of the disputed amount of tax till the disposal of the appeals. First appellate authority allowed the applications in part and stayed the disputed amount of tax to the extent of 70%.  Being aggrieved by the orders of the first appellate authority, applicant filed two appeals before the Tribunal. Tribunal by the impugned orders allowed both the appeals in part. Tribunal has stayed the realization of the disputed amount of tax to the extent of 90% till the disposal of the appeals. Being aggrieved by the orders of the Tribunal, present revisions have been filed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

With the consent of both the parties, both the revisions are being disposed of at the admission stage.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that so far as stay granted to the 90% under Central Sales Tax Act is concerned, is arbitrary and excessive. He submitted that 10% of the disputed amount of tax comes to Rs.15,88,8912.20p. He submitted that the dispute relates to the rejection of stock transfer to the various depot, which have been treated as inter-State sales merely on the ground that the goods have been manufactured as per the specifications of the customer and have been despatched to the depot in pursuance of the prior order of the purchaser. He submitted that this view of the assessing authority is patently erroneous, in as much as assessing authority had not examined the each individual transactions and had not recorded  any finding in respect of the each individual transactions. He submitted that the applicant is also running in financial crisis, in as much as there is no sufficient liquidated funds to deposit the amount. He requested that the entire disputed amount of tax is to be stayed till the disposal of the appeals and the first appellate authority be directed to decide the appeals expeditiously. Learned Standing Counsel has supported the order of Tribunal.

Having regard to the facts of the present case, in my view no interference is called for so far as the stay granted under U.P. Trade Tax Act is concerned.  So far as Central Sales Tax Act is concerned, in my view little modification in the order of the Tribunal is required. In place of asking the applicant to deposit Rs.15,88,889.12p. being 10% of the disputed amount of tax, I direct the applicant to deposit Rs.10 lacs only and furnishes the security of the balance amount as required under the Act. The balance amount shall remain stayed till the disposal of the first appeals.

Further, having regard to the quantum of the disputed amount of tax first appellate authority is directed to decide both the appeals expeditiously in accordance to the law.

In the result, revision no.2604 of 2005 is dismissed and revision no.2605 of 2005 which relates to the Central Sales Tax is allowed in part.

Dt.02.01.2006

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.