Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE, U.P. LUCKNOW versus S/S PREM STEELS PVT. LTD., MUZAFFARNAGAR

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade, U.P. Lucknow v. S/S Prem Steels Pvt. Ltd., Muzaffarnagar - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 445 of 1999 [2005] RD-AH 6624 (29 November 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court no.55

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.445 of 1999.

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

Versus

M/S Prem Steels Pvt.Ltd., Muzaffarnagar.  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 11th February, 1999  relating to the assessment year 1992-93 by which the Tribunal confirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Trade Tax, Saharanpur deleting the penalty .levied under section 10-A of the Act.

Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "dealer") was registered under the Central Sales Tax Act for iron and steel. During the year under consideration, dealer had purchased sponge iron from outside the State of U.P. and issued Form C thereon. Assessing authority levied penalty under section 10-A of the Act on the ground that the sponge iron was not covered under iron and steel and dealer had wrongly issued Form C while making the purchases of sponge iron. First appeal filed by the dealer was allowed. Tribunal, by the impugned order, confirmed the order of the first appellate authority.

Heard learned Standing counsel.

I have perused the order of the Tribunal and the authorities below.

Tribunal and the first appellate authority held that the sponge iron is like a pig iron and is metallic iron. It has been further held that the dealer had issued Form C under the bonafide believe that the sponge iron was covered under iron and steel for which the dealer was registered and, therefore, there was no false representation on the part of the dealer in issuing Form 'C' while making the purchases of sponge iron. I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal. Finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact, which does not require any interference.

In the result, revision fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dated.29.11.2005.

VS.


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.