Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S. HIM POTTERY WORKS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR versus TRDE TAX COMMISSIONER LKO.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S. Him Pottery Works Through Its Proprietor v. Trde Tax Commissioner Lko. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 270 of 1996 [2004] RD-AH 1162 (14 October 2004)

 

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

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.270 OF 1996

M/s Him Pottery Works. ....Applicant

Versus

Trade Tax Commission, U.P., Lucknow. ....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 10.11.1995 relating to the assessment year 1988-89.

During the year under consideration, applicant had sold electric porcelain for Rs.50,655/- to M/s Shreedhar Switch gear, Gandhi Nagar, Muzaffarnagar and submitted Form 3-B No.255272 before the assessing authority and claimed exemption on such turn over. Assessing authority disallowed the claim of exemption against such Form 3-B on the ground that the applicant could not explain that how the money was received. First appellate authority rejected the appeal and the Tribunal has also rejected the second appeal.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that rejection of claim of exemption against Form 3-B is erroneous and based on irrelevant consideration. He submitted that form was not found to be non-genuine, still the claim of exemption has been refused. He further submitted that Form 3-B, issued by first appellate authority in the assessment year 1988-89 has been accepted by the Tribunal vide its order dated 29.05.1997

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In my view, order of the Tribunal rejecting the claim of exemption against alleged Form 3-B is erroneous. Perusal of the order of the authorities below shows that none of the authorities have found Form 3-B forged or non-genuine. The rejection of claim of exemption against such Form 3-B on the ground that the applicant has not maintained the manufacturing account and the sales are not established from the record, is not justified. The sales made to M/s Shreedhar Switch Gear, Muzaffarnagar against four bills for Rs.50,655/-, details of which are mentioned in the Form 3-B itself, have been taxed by the assessing authority, therefore, sales to the said party has not been disputed.  Therefore, there is no reason to disallow the claim of exemption against Form 3-B. I have perused the order of Tribunal dated 29.05.1997 for the assessment year 1989-90, in which under the similar circumstances Tribunal has allowed the claim of exemption against Form 3-B, issued by the said party. In my opinion, in the absence of any material that the said Form 3-B was found forged or non-genuine or obtained as a result of collusion, the rejection of claim of exemption against Form 3-B is not justified.

In the result, revision is allowed. Order of Tribunal is set aside and the Tribunal is directed to pass the appropriate order under section 11 (8) of the Act.

Dt.14.10.2004

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.