Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JANTA STORES, SHAHJAHANPUR. versus COMMISSIONER SALES TAX, U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Janta Stores, Shahjahanpur. v. Commissioner Sales Tax, U.P. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1641 of 1993 [2003] RD-AH 494 (4 December 2003)

 

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

SALES TAX REVISION NO.1641 OF 1993

Janta Stores, Shahjahanpur. ....Applicant

Versus

Commissioner Sales Tax, U.P. ....Opp.Party

............

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

This revision is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 07.07.1993 relating to the assessment year 1984-85.

Applicant was carrying on the business of readymade garments, shawls, towels etc. Applicant had maintained books of account relating to the purchases and sales but separate sales account for taxable and non-taxable goods have not been maintained and the taxable sales have been disclosed on the basis of taxable purchases plus profit and expenses. During the year under consideration, applicant had made taxable purchases for Rs.23,954.70p. and on the basis of said purchases disclosed taxable sales at Rs.28,743.70p., which consisted of sale of Ex-U.P. readymade garments at Rs.18,390.40p. and Ex-U.P. cotton hosiery at Rs.10,355.33p.. Assessing Authority rejected the books of account  and estimated taxable turn over at Rs.2,70,000/-. First Appellate Authority allowed the appeal in part and estimated taxable turn over at Rs.60,000/- Against the order of first appellate Authority, Commissioner of Sales Tax filed appeal before Tribunal. No appeal was filed by the applicant. Tribunal vide order dated 07.07.1993 allowed the appeal in part and estimated taxable turn over at Rs.2 lacs. Aggrieved by the order of Tribunal, applicant has filed the present revision.

Heard Sri K.Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K.Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant had maintained the books in the same fashion as they were maintained in the earlier years and in the earlier years taxable turn over were always disclosed and assessed on the basis of taxable purchases plus profit and expenses. He submitted that in earlier year, taxable turn over was estimated after adding 30% profit on taxable purchases. According to his submission, Tribunal has erred in observing that in the stock found at the time of survey, quantity of Ex-U.P. goods was higher while when the applicant was paying tax on the basis of purchases and entire stock according to him was tax paid. He submitted that first appellate authority recorded a finding that there was no difference in the stock found at the time of survey and as per books of account and first appellate authority further recorded a finding that there was no material for the suppression of purchases and, therefore, there was no reason to enhance the turn over by the Tribunal as against the turn over fixed by the first appellate authority.

I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below.

Tribunal has not adjudicated to the finding recorded by first appellate authority namely that no difference was found at the time of survey and stock as per the books of account and there was no material for the suppression of purchases. It is not disputed that in the earlier years taxable turn over was estimated on the basis of purchases after adding profit.  Therefore, entire closing stock is deemed to be tax paid. No case of suppression of purchases has been made out by Tribunal or by assessing authority and, therefore, turn over estimated by first appellate authority at Rs.60,000/- as against the taxable purchase at Rs.23,954.70p. can not be said to be arbitrary. There was no reason to interfere with the order of first appellate authority. Enhancement of turn over by Tribunal is arbitrary and without any basis.

In the result, revision is allowed. Order of Tribunal dated 07.07.1993 is set aside and order of first appellate authority is restored.

Dt.04.12.2003

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.