High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ram Autar Gupta v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 12 of 1997  RD-AH 491 (22 February 2005)
TRADE TAX REVISION NO.12 OF 1997
TRADE TAX REVISION NO.13 OF 1997
Ram Autar Gupta. ....Applicant
Commissioner of Trade tax, U.P. Lucknow. ....Opp.party
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
These two revisions under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 14.10.1996 for the assessment year 1985-86 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act.
Applicant was engaged in the business of Rab etc. During the year under consideration, assessing authority received information from Mandi Samiti about the despatch of the goods to outside the State of U.P. against gate passes. In respect of some of the information, applicant filed certificate of Mandi Samiti that those gate passes were not in his name. However, some of the information has been certified by Mandi Samiti that the gate passes were in the name of the applicant. In respect of which no certificate was filed. In respect of some information, record was not available but no certificate was filed by the applicant that they did not relate to them. Assessing authority had drawn adverse inference and estimated the turn over on the basis of the information received from Mandi Samiti about the issuance of gate passes and the despatch of goods in respect of which no certificate was filed by the applicant to prove that they did not relate to them. First appeals filed by the applicant were rejected. Applicant filed two appeals before the Tribunal. Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the appeals in part and reduced the turn over. It appears that before the Tribunal, applicant has filed certificate of Mandi Samiti in respect of those informations where it was found that the record of the Mandi Samiti was not available. Tribunal accepted the certificate and allowed the relief. Tribunal however, upheld the order of the authorities below drawing adverse inference in respect of the information received from Mandi Samiti in respect of those gate passes where the applicant could not file any certificate that they did not relate to it and the Mandi Samiti certified that gate passes were issued in the name of the applicant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
I do not find any error in the order of Tribunal, which is based on the material on record. Finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact, which does not require any interference.
In the result, both the revisions fail and are accordingly, dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.