High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Daya Shankar Singh v. Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1281 of 1997  RD-AH 3936 (4 October 2005)
Court no. 55
Trade Tax Revision no. 1281 Of 1997.
Daya Shanker Singh, Sonbhadra. ... Applicant.
Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow. ...Opp. Party.
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
The present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 29.07.1997 relating to the assessment year 1986-87 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.
Applicant was engaged in the business of Tendu Leaves. It is claimed that the business had been carried on at Basantpur Sarguja, Madhya Pradesh, and was registered under the M. P. Sales Tax Act with the permanent address shown as Murdhawan, Renukoot, Sonbhadra, U. P.
During the year 1986-87, applicant obtained Theka for plucking Tendu Leaves from Forest of MadhyaPradesh. Since, there was no proper transportation facilities at Madhya Pradesh, therefore, goods had been brought inside the State of U. P. at Renukoot and thereafter, had been transported to Maharashtra. During the year under consideration, applicant had disclosed interstate sale of 15001 bags of Tendu Leaves for Rs.27,89,857/- to M/S Vidarbh Tobacco Products Limited, Maharashtra on which, tax @ 4% had been paid at Madhya Pradesh. There is no dispute about such sales. Assessing Authority, however, received information from the Forest Check Post, Babhani about the import of 197 Truck, 16558 Manak Bora Tendu Leaves and 40 Truck Timber wood and from the Regional Forest Officer, Obra, Renukoot about the issuance of TP (IV) for 28255 bags. The Assessing Authority had taken 16558 Manak Bora equal to 28255 actual bags. The Assessing Authority issued Show-cause-notice to the applicant to explain that out of 28255 bags only 15001 bags shown to have been sold in the course of interstate sales and how rest of the bags have been disposed of. Assessee instead of producing any evidence and giving details of disposal of 13254 bags has stated that since at different stages different information had been received, therefore, it was not reliable. He further submitted that the goods had not been sold inside the State of U. P. and at no stage, applicant was found selling goods inside the State of U. P. With regard to the Timber, it had been stated that though the import of Timber had been admitted to had been imported, but it had been explained that they had been used in the construction of their own house had not been sold inside the State of U. P. The Assessing Authority, had not accepted the plea of the applicant and treated the sale of 13254 bags of Tendu Leaves being difference of 28255 bags and 15001 bags inside the State of U. P. and has also not accepted the plea that the entire quantity of imported Timber had been used in the construction of house. The Assessing Authority estimated the value of Timber at Rs.8 Lacs and after giving the benefit for personal use at Rs.1,40,000/-, levied tax on the turnover of Rs.6,60,000/- First Appeal filed by the applicant was rejected. Applicant filed Second Appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal vide impugned order, allowed the appeal in part. Tribunal has sustained the estimate of turnover of Tendu Leaves but has reduced the turnover of Timber to Rs.3,60,000/-
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant had not made any sales of Tendu Leaves inside the State of U. P. He contended that before the Assessing Authority, an affidavit was filed, in which, it was stated that no sale was made inside the State of U. P. He further contended that at different stages, different information about the quantity and Truck number of Tendu Leaves had been received, therefore, such information could not be relied upon. He submitted that the estimate of turnover of Tendu leaves and Timber are arbitrary and excessive.
I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below. I do not find any substance in the argument of learned Counsel for the applicant. Perusal of assessment order shows that specific information was received from the Forest Check Post, Babhani about the import of 197 Truck 16558 Manak bags Tendu Leaves and 40 Truck Timber wood and from the Regional Forest Officer for issuance of TP (IV) in respect of 28255 Bags of Tendu Leaves. Assessing Authority had held that 16558 Manak Bora was equal to 28255 normal bags against which, no contrary material has been brought on record. Applicant had also not filed any Certificate or any evidence to dispute the information sent by the Forest Department. Mere saying that the information was incorrect and no sales have been made within the State of U. P. , was not sufficient. In the absence of any evidence, to the contrary the information sent by Government Department cannot be disputed. Authorities below have rightly inferred that the balance quantity of bags in respect of which, no explanation of their disposal was given, have been sold inside the State of U. P. In the circumstances, estimate of turnover cannot be said to be arbitrary and without any basis. The estimate of Timber also cannot be said to be arbitrary and without any basis.
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.