Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW versus S/S A.H.TRADERS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Commissioner Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow v. S/S A.H.Traders, Muzaffarnagar - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 243 of 1999 [2005] RD-AH 6966 (6 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.(243) OF 1999

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.(258) OF 1999

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

Versus

S/S A.H.Traders, Muzaffarnagar. ....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 13.11.1998 for the assessment year 1984-85, by which Tribunal has confirmed the order of first appellate authority cancelling the penalty levied under section 15-A (1) (c) and (d) of the Act. It appears that the order under section 21 of the Act was passed by the assessing authority estimating the suppressed turn over and in pursuance thereof penalty under section 15-A (1)(c) and (d) of the Act have been levied. In appeal, order passed under section 21 of the Act has been set aside and the matter has been remanded back to the assessing authority to pass the order afresh. When the matter cam up in appeal against the penalty order, first appellate authority quashed the penalty order on the ground that order under section 21 of the Act had been set aside. While quashing the orders, first appellate authority has observed that it is open to the assessing authority to initiate fresh proceeding after passing the penalty order. Order of the first appellate authority has been confirmed by the Tribunal.

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

I do not find any error in the order of Tribunal, which is based on the material on record.

In the result, both the revisions fails and are accordingly, dismissed.

Dt.06.12.2005

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.