Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

OLYMPIC PETRO PRODUCTS LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Olympic Petro Products Ltd. v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 125 of 2001 [2007] RD-AH 3085 (23 February 2007)

 

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.22

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.125 of 2001.

Olympic Petro Products Limited, Meerut Cantt.    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 22nd November, 2000 relating to the assessment year, 1996-97 by which the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty levied under section 15-A (1) (o) of the Act.

Applicant was found importing 70 kg of polyester yarn in excess of the quantity declared in Form 31 and in the bill. The quantity of the goods was detected by the Check Post Officer on physical verification. The goods were seized and subsequently released on furnishing of security. Assessing authority levied the penalty at Rs.3, 780/- on the ground that the applicant was found importing the goods in an attempt to evade the tax in excess of the quantity disclosed in the declaration Form and in the bill. The said penalty has been confirmed in first appeal and by the Tribunal.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was a new unit and was holding eligibility certificate under section 4-A of the Act by which the exemption was granted for the period of eight years from 23rd February, 1992 to 22nd November, 2000 and therefore, there could not be any intention to evade the turnover and tax. The argument of the learned counsel for the applicant cannot be accepted for the reason that the exemption to the new unit was available to the fixed amount for the period of eight years. The amount of tax levied would be liable to be adjusted with the amount for which the exemption was granted. If the applicant is found suppressing the production and the turnover, the liability of tax could be enhanced which would reduce the exemption amount. The finding of the  Tribunal that the applicant was found importing the goods in an attempt to evade the tax is finding of fact, which needs no interference.

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

Dated.23.02.2007.

VS.


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.