Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S SHIVAM TRADERS THR' ITS PROP. RAMESH CHAND KATARE versus THE COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Shivam Traders Thr' Its Prop. Ramesh Chand Katare v. The Commissioner Of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 2552 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6902 (5 December 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.2552 OF 2005

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.2553 OF 2005

M/s Shivam Traders, Jhansi. ....Applicant

Versus

The 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 30.08.2005 for the assessment year 1990-91 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act.

It appears that on the basis of certain information relating to the purchase and sales received from the Mandi Samiti, which according to the assessing authority could not be verified, tax under section 21 of the Act was levied. Matter went to the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, it was submitted that that the information has not been confronted  and the opportunity of cross examination has not been given. It has also been submitted that before the issuance of the notice, there must be some material, to form the believe about the escaped assessment. Tribunal has remanded back the matter to the assessing authority to provide proper opportunity of hearing to confront the information and also give opportunity of cross examination.  Tribunal also directed that proper show cause notice should be given before levying the tax on the purchases and sales.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

With the consent of the parties, both the revisions are being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that proceeding under section 21 of the Act was invalid, because there was no material at the time of issuance of notice, to form the believe about the escaped assessment and this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Tribunal and no direction in this regard has been given by the Tribunal.

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

Both the revisions are being disposed of with the direction that in addition to the direction given by the Tribunal assessing authority is further directed to disclose the applicant, material  available at the time of issuance of the notice under section 21 of the Act on the basis of which believe was formed about the escaped assessment and adjudicate the issue.

With the aforesaid observation, both the revisions are disposed of.

Dt.05.12.2005

R./


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.