High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner, Trade Tax,U.P. Lucknow v. S/S Amit Udyog, Moradabad - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 757 of 2001  RD-AH 5761 (30 March 2007)
TRADE TAX REVISION NO.757 of 2001.
The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow. Applicant
S/S Amit Udyog, Bajigaran Street, Moradabad. Opp.Party.
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
At the instance of the revenue, which relates to the assessment year, 1996-97, following two questions have been raised:
1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified to hold that notification no.191 dated 1.2.1990 became ineffective after notification no.1225 dated 31.3.1992 despite notification dated 31.3.1992 was issued to amend the notification no.5785 dated 7.9.1981 and it had no effect on notification no.191 dated 1.2.1990?
2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified to hold that copper sheets and circle are taxable at the rate of 2 % under notification No.1225 dated 31.3.1992?
Brief facts of the case are that the dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "the dealer") was carrying on the business of copper sheets and circles. It claimed that in view of the Notification No.1225 dated 31.3.1992, copper sheets and circles required for use in the manufacturing of brassware liable to tax at the rate of 2 percent. Assessing authority levied the tax at the rate of 4 percent under Notification No. 191 dated 1.2.1990. The matter came up before the Tribunal in appeal. Tribunal vide order dated 21.04.1999 allowed the appeal and held that the copper sheets and circles liable to tax at the rate of 2 percent under Notification No.1225 dated 31.3.1992. It has been further held that Notification dated 1.2.1990 has become ineffective after the commencement of the Notification in the year, 1992. Revenue moved an application under section 22 of the Act for the rectification of the aforesaid order. Tribunal by the impugned order rejected the application. Tribunal held that the Tribunal in its order dated 21.04.1999 has taken the view that after the Notification no.1225 dated 31.3.1992, Notification No.191 dated 1.2.1990 has become ineffective after hearing both the parties. Whatever may be the mistake in applying the law in any case cannot be rectified subsequently as the Tribunal has no power to review the order. Tribunal refused to rectify its earlier view and held that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record.
Heard learned Standing Counsel.
In the present case, no question has been framed challenging the order of the Tribunal on the first issue, namely, that by means of application under section 22 of the Act, revenue sought the review of the order, which is not permissible.
In view of the fact that no question has been framed in this regard, the questions raised on merit is only academic . In these circumstances, no interference is called for and the order of the Tribunal is upheld.
In the result, revision fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.