High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner, Trade Tax U.P.Lucknow v. S/S Kalpana Coal Agency - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 69 of 1996  RD-AH 8 (7 January 2003)
Trade Tax Revision no. 69 Of 1996
Commissioner, Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow...............Applicant.
M/S Kalpana Coal Company, Varanasi. ............................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, U. P. Lucknow relates to the assessment year 1993-94 against the order of Tribunal dated 20.6.1995.
The dealer-opp. Party was carrying on the business of purchase and sale of Coal of the assessment year under consideration. The dealer maintained the books of accounts in Form of Roka Khata, Cash memo, purchase voucher, purchase register, Sale register, Stock register, freight voucher, Transport builty and Register-36 etc. and disclosed the taxable turnover at Rs.76,40,075. The Assessing Authority has rejected the books of accounts and estimated taxable turnover of Coal at Rs.1,43,50,000/-.
Aggrieved by the assessing order, the dealer filed appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Trade Tax, Varanasi which was allowed in part. The taxable turn over has been reduced to Rs.78,00,000/-. Against the order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), the Commissioner of Trade Tax as well as dealer filed appeals before the Trade Tax Tribunal, Varanasi. The Tribunal vide its order dated 20.6.1995 rejected the appeal of Commissioner of Trade Tax and allowed the appeal of the dealer. The Tribunal has accepted the books of accounts and disclosed turnover.
I have heard Sri Mansha Ram Jaiswal, learned Standing Counsel. The contention of learned Standing Counsel are that the dealer has disclosed less selling rate than selling rate of other dealer and duplicate copy of some of Form 31 could not be produced for verification. I have perused the order of Tribunal and order of authorities below. It is not disputed that there are various verities of coal of different grades. The selling price depends upon the verieties and grade of coal, unless specific case of under pricing with regard to veriety and grade of coal is made out, the objection with regard to selling price, merely on surmises and conjectures, is not sustainable and the books of accounts, can not be rejected on this ground. The Tribunal has recorded the finding of fact that no defect was found in the books of accounts. The purchases were made against the vouchers and the same was verified. It has also been observed that the sales have been made by regular sale vouchers which no defects have been found. The finding recorded by the Tribunal are the finding of fact based on material on record which can
not be interfered. The learned Standing Counsel is not able to point out that the finding of Tribunal, are perverse and based on no material on record.
For the reasons above, I see no error in the order of Tribunal is set aside on the finding of fact. No question of law are involved in the present revision.
The revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.