THE COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW versus S/S G.C. INDUSTRIES HATHRAS ROAD

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

The Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow v. S/S G.C. Industries Hathras Road - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 187 of 2001 [2007] RD-AH 3453 (28 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.187 OF 2001

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

Versus

S/S G. C. Industries Hathras Road, Agra.   .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 25.10.2000 relating to the assessment year 1993-94 under Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Central Act").

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "Dealer") has foundry  and was involved in carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of iron steel items.  Assessing authority levied the penalty under section 10-A of Central Act on the ground that the dealer had used the imported coal in respect of which Form C was furnished, in the manufacturing while registration was granted for re-sale of such coal. According to the assessing authority dealer had violated the provision of section 10 (d) of Central Act. Order of the assessing authority has been confirmed by the first appellate authority. Tribunal by the impugned order deleted the penalty on the ground that inadvertently in the application claiming the registration, the coal was mentioned in Column 4 relating to re-sale while admittedly, dealer was involved in the business of manufacture and intended to get the registration for the purchase of the goods required in the use of manufacturing. Tribunal held that there was no malafide intention on the part of the dealer. On the facts and circumstances of the case, finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact. No question of law is involved.

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

Dt.28.02.2007

R./

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 |

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