High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner, Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow v. S/S. Rana Steel Kumhreda - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 121 of 1996  RD-AH 15 (9 January 2003)
Sales Tax Revision no. 121 of 1996
The Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P.Lucknow..............Revisionist.
M/S Rana Steel, Saharanpur....................................Opp.party.
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
This is revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act filed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax against the order of Tribunal dated 19th August, 1995 for the assessment year 1981-82.
The following question of law has been raised:-
"Whether the Tribunal was legally justified to exempt the sale of the selling dealer against form 3 Kha which were issued by the purchasing dealer who was no entitled to purchase those goods at concessional rate and was not registered even during that period u/S 4 B of the Act ? "
The brief facts of the case are that the dealer opp. Party sold Iron and Steel.to M/S Kalpna Rugs, Varanasi for Rs.8,96,485/- and received form 3-B in respect of the said sale from M/S Kalpna Rugs, Varanasi. The form 3-B was filed at the time of assessment and exemption was claimed. The Assessing Authority was disallowed the claim of exemption against form 3-B on the ground that M/S Kalpna Rugs, Varanasi was holding recognition certificate with effect from 3.3.1983 and was not holding the recognition certificate during this period. Against the order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), the dealer filed a Second Appeal before the Trade Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur. The Tribunal, Moradabad vide its order dated 19th August, 1995 accepted the plea of dealer and deleted the tax and allowed the exemption against Form 3-B. Being aggrieved by the order of Tribunal, the present revision has been filed.
I have heard Sri G.C. Upadhayay, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Piyush Agrawal. I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below. The Tribunal has recorded the finding that the exemption was claimed by the assessee on the basis of form 3 Kha issued by purchasing dealer M/S Kalpna Enterprises which was given to him by its Assessing Authority and Assessing Autyhority has not held that these forms were not genuine. This finding of Tribunal has not been disputed by the learned Standing Counsel. If the form was found to be genuine issued by the assessing authority of M/s Kalpana Rugs,Varanasi merely because it was subsequently found to have been wrongly issued by the purchasing dealer or it should not have been issued by the purchasing dealer, the claim of exemption in the hand of selling dealer, can not be denied. For any wrong committed by the purchasing dealer, selling cannot be held responsible and necessary action can be taken only against the purchasing dealer under Section 3-B of the Act.
The competent authority issued recognition certificate after having satisfied by making the necessary enquries as it this
For the reasons above, there is no error in the order of the Tribunal.
The revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.