High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner Trade Tax v. M/S. Jai Bajrang Galls Bhandar - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 1568 of 1998  RD-AH 4161 (6 October 2005)
Court no. 55
Trade Tax Revision no. (1568) Of 1998.
Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow. ... Applicant.
S/S Jai Bajrang Galla Bhandar, Maharajganj. ... 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 23.04.1998 relating to the assessment year 1993-94 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.
The short question involved in the present revision is whether the alleged purchases made on behalf of Ex-U. P. Principal are in the course of interstate purchases. Assessing Authority as well as Deputy Commissioner (Appeal) rejected the claim of purchases made on behalf of Ex-U. P. Principal on the ground that the detail of the seller, order on the basis of which, purchases have been made, and despatched to behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal have not been furnished.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Tribunal while coming to the conclusion that the purchases have been made on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal, should examine each and every transactions while, the Tribunal has only referred few 6-R and 9-R and only on the basis of detail furnished by the dealer observed that mainly goods have been despatched on the same day or on the next day after making the purchases without verification, therefore, order of Tribunal is vitiated. Learned Counsel for the opposite party relied upon the order of Tribunal.
I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below.
In my view, order of Tribunal cannot be sustained. For coming to the conclusion that the purchases were made in the course of sale interstate sales, it is necessary that the purchases should be made for and on behalf of Ex-U. P. Principal and thereafter, goods should be despatched outside the State of U. P. at the destination of Ex- U. P. Principal and both purchases and despatch should be integrally connected. Admittedly, dealer could not produce any order of Ex- U. P. Principal on the basis of which purchases alleged to have been made, therefore, claim of dealer that the purchases were made on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal can only be examined from the entries in the books of account and other circumstances. Perusal of order of Tribunal shows that the books of account, have not been examined and only few 6-R and 9-R have been considered and on the basis of detail filed by the dealer, it has been observed that the goods have been mainly sent on the same day or on the next day. In the circumstances, matter requires reconsideration. Tribunal is directed to examine each and every transaction relating to the purchases from the books of account and decide the issue afresh in the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CST Vs M/S Bakhtawar Lal Kailash Chandra reported in 1992 UPTC page 971
In the result, revision is allowed. Order of Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh in the light of observations made above.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.