Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW versus S/S R.K. SUPPLIERS, HAUZA MADASRA, SAMBHAL

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow v. S/S R.K. Suppliers, Hauza Madasra, Sambhal - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 295 of 1999 [2005] RD-AH 7364 (12 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.(295) OF 1999

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

Versus

S/S R.K.Suppliers, Sambhal. ....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 28.10.1998 for the assessment year 1997-98.

Assessing authority demanded the additional security at Rs.1 crore in the form of bank guarantee. Against the order of the assessing authority, first appeals filed by the  dealer was allowed in part.  In first appeals amount of security was reduced to Rs.10 lacs. Against the order of the first appellate authority dealer filed appeal no.41 of 1998, which was allowed by the Tribunal vide order dated 30.05.1999 and demand of additional security has been held unjustified. It appears that against the order of first appellate authority, Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeal, which has been rejected by the Tribunal by the impugned order on the ground that the dealer's appeal no.41 of 1998 was heard and decided on merit in the presence of State Representative and on these fact it has been held that the State appeal has no merit. It appears that for non- furnishing of additional security registration of the dealer was rejected. First appellate authority allowed the appeal and set aside the order canceling the registration. Against the order of first appellate authority, Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeal before the Tribunal, which has been rejected by the impugned order.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Against the order of the Tribunal rejecting the appeal of Commissioner of Trade Tax relating to the security, revision no.300 of 1999 has already been dismissed by this court on 07.12.2005. In view of the aforesaid fact, I do not find any error in the order of  Tribunal, which is based on material on record. No question of law is involved.

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

Dt.12.12.2005

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.