Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Kanhaiya Lal And Sons v. Commissioner Trade Tax U.P.Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1280 of 1997 [2005] RD-AH 743 (15 March 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).


Court no.55


Kanhaiya Lal and Sons,Varanasi.             Applicant


Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow.                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 30th  August, 1997 relating to the assessment year, 1990-91.

Applicant was carrying on the business of wood and while importing the goods in vehicle no. BEF-5576 inside the State of U.P. against Form 31, check post officer seized the goods with the view that the value shown was less than what it should be. Accordingly, goods were seized and subsequently released on furnishing of security. In pursuance of the seizure order, penalty under section 15-A (1) (0) of the Act was levied. First appellate authority allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty. Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal allowed the appeal and levied penalty to the extent of Rs.40,000/-.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there was no case of under valuation. He submitted that the price shown was correct and was as per the quality of the goods. He submitted that the goods was admittedly accompanied by Form 31 and bill and after receipt of the goods, same was incorporated in the books of account and on its sale, tax was paid. He submitted that during the course of the assessment proceeding, entire purchases and sale were examined and vide order dated 5.2.1994, books of account have been accepted, therefore, the objection that the lesser value was shown become meaningless inasmuch as no case of an attempt to evade tax is made out. Learned Standing Counsel supported the order of the Tribunal.

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

Admittedly, at the time of import of the goods, the goods was accompanied by Form 31 and the bill, therefore, it cannot be said to be an un-declared goods. Entry of the goods have been made in the books of account and have been shown at the time of the assessment proceeding. Assessing authority without raising any objection of under valuation or making out any case of an attempt to evade tax accepted the books of account and disclosed turnover. In these circumstances, penalty under section 15-A (1) (o) of the Act in the absence of any case of an attempt to evade tax is not justified.

In the result, revision is allowed. Order of the Tribunal dated 30th August, 1997 is set aside.




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


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 |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.