Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


The Commissione,Trade Tax,U.P.Lucknow v. S/S Sadik Ali Nasad Kothi Lal Diggi - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 1838 of 1998 [2005] RD-AH 4850 (25 October 2005)


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).


Court no. 55

Trade Tax Revision no.  (1838) Of 1998.

The Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow. ... Applicant.


S/S Sadik Ali, Aligarh. ... 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 21.05.1998 relating to assessment year 1987-88 under the U. P. Trade Tax Act.

Dealer/Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as "the Dealer") was a Contractor and admittedly, executed a civil nature works during the year under consideration, in which, Bricks, Cement, Sand etc. have been used.  Assessing Authority had levied tax on the turnover of Bricks, Cement, Rori, Sand etc. on the ground that the dealer could not produce any purchase voucher in respect of the aforesaid items and could not prove the source of purchases.  Dealer filed appeal before the Asstt. Commissioner (Judl.), Sales Tax which had been allowed in part.  First Appellate Authority deleted the tax levied on the Iron Steel and Cement on the ground that they have been purchased locally and also reduced the turnover of Rori, Sand etc.  Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeal before the Tribunal which has been dismissed vide impugned order.

Heard learned Standing Counsel.  No one appears on behalf of the dealer despite service of notice.

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the exemption on the locally purchased goods can only be allowed under Section 3-F (2) (b) (iii) in case if the sale or purchase tax has been levied or leviable under this Act at some earlier stage which in the present case, dealer had failed to establish, inasmuch as, purchase voucher or any other documents have not been produced.  I find substance in the argument of learned Standing Counsel.  Under Section 3-F value of goods involved in the execution of works contract, is liable to tax.  Section 3-F (2) (b) provides deduction of turnover from the net turnover.  Clause-(iii) of sub section 3-F (2) (b) reads as follows:-

Clause-(iii) of sub section 3-F (2) (b)

The amount representing the value of the goods, on the sale or purchase whereof tax has been levied or is leviable under this Act at some earlier stage.

In the present case, dealer was not produced any purchase voucher or any documents to prove that the has had been levied on the Bricks, Cement or Iron which have been used in the execution of works contract or is leviable under this Act at some earlier stage.  In this view of the matter granting exemption on the turnover of Bricks, Cement and Steel on the ground that they have been locally purchased, is not justified.

In the result, revision is allowed.  Order of Tribunal granting exemption on the turnover of Bricks, Cement and Sariya is set aside.  Tribunal is directed to pass appropriate order under Section 11 (8) of the Act.




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


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 |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.