Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S SANJAY TUBE CO. versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Sanjay Tube Co. v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 203 of 1997 [2005] RD-AH 90 (6 January 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.203 OF 1997

M/s Sanjay Tube Company. ....Applicant

Versus

The Commissioner of  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 06.01.1997 for the assessment year 1992-93 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

Applicant was carrying on the business of manufacture and sales of steel tube and pipes both within the State of U.P. as well as outside the State of U.P. Books of account have been rejected and the turn over was enhanced by Rs.12 lacs by the assessing authority. First appeal filed by the applicant was allowed in part and the enhanced turn over was reduced to Rs.8 lacs. Applicant filed second appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed in part and the enhanced turn over was reduced to Rs.4 lacs.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the rejection of books of account and the enhancement by Rs.4 lacs is arbitrary and without any basis. Learned Standing Counsel supported the order of Tribunal.

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

I do not find any force in the argument of learned counsel for the applicant. Books of account have been rejected on the ground that at the time of survey dated 07.11.1992 except bill book, no other books of account were found. Applicant was asked by S.T.O. (S.I.B.) to produce the books of account several times, but books of account could not be produced and the time was only sought. Apart from this at the time of survey, stock of steel pipe was found, in which "Hisar" marka and other marks were mentioned. Applicant was asked to produce the bills relating to the such goods. Tribunal found that in the bills produced by the applicant, no such marks was mentioned, in as much as the certificate of seller was also not filed certifying that they deals in "Hisar" marka of pipe. On this ground, it has been inferred that the applicant failed to establish the purchase of such pipes within the State of U.P. and on this basis, turn over was enhanced by Rs.4 lacs. I do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Tribunal, which is concluded by finding of fact.

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

Dt.06.01.2005

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.