Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

S/S D.K.STEELS versus THE COMMISSIONER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


S/S D.K.Steels v. The Commissioner - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 935 of 1999 [2006] RD-AH 1159 (17 January 2006)

 

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.935 of 1999

S/S D.K. Steels, Atiya Talab, District Jhansi.   ...  Applicant.

Vs

The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow. ... Opp. party.

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO. 1150  of 1999

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

Versus

S/S D.K. Steels, Atiya Talab, District Jhansi.                  Opp.party

...............

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present two revisions under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 02.08.1999 relating to the assessment year 1994-95.

Revision no. 935 of 1999 has been filed by the applicant/dealer and Revision no,. 1150 of 1999 has been filed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax against the same order.  

The dispute relates to the rejection of books of account and estimate of turnover.  Dealer was carrying on the business of iron scrap and disclosed the taxable turnover at Rs.2, 06,369/-.  The assessing authority rejected the books of account on the ground that the dealer had attempted to import two trucks of iron scrap from outside the State of U. P. without declaration form on 7.3.1995.  Assessing Authority further, found that at the time of survey dated 18.3.1995 made by TTO (SIB) loose parchas were found, each and every parchas has been dealt with by the assessing authority.  In respect of some of the parchas, the assessing authority observed that the entry in such parchas relate to the goods purchased from outside the State of U. P. and sold outside the State of U. P., entry of which, were not found in the books of account.  Assessing Authority estimated the taxable turnover at Rs.18, 00,000/- by way of best judgment assessment.  In first appeal, rejection of books of account has been up held but the turnover was reduced to Rs.10 Lacs.  Applicant as well as Commissioner of Trade Tax filed appeals before the Tribunal.  Tribunal by the impugned order rejected the appeal of the Commissioner of Trade Tax and partly allowed the appeal of the dealer/applicant.  Tribunal has sustained the rejection of books of account but has reduced the taxable turnover to Rs.4 Lacs.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the Tribunal has illegally observed that the entries of some parchas were not found entered in the books of account.  He submitted that entries of each and every purchas were found entered in the books of account which is clear from the assessment order and thus, rejection of books of account and enhancement of turnover is unjusutified.  Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has illegally reduced the taxable turnover to Rs.4 Lacs.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below.

Learned Standing Counsel is not able to show that the entries of parchas seized at the time of survey were found entered in the books of account.  Perusal of the assessment order shows that the assessing authority found that the entry of the seized purchas were available in the books of account and adverse inference was drawn from the import of two trucks of iron scrap from outside the State of U. P. without declaration form and in respect of the parchas nos. 1 to 11, 13, 16, 17, 22 and 25, it has been observed that the entries related to the purchases of iron scrap made out side the State of U. P. and sale of such iron scrap out side the State of U. P.  Tribunal held that no adverse inference can be drawn from such purchas because the goods had not been brought inside the State of U. P. and they had been sold in Madhya Pradesh itself.  In the circumstances, the only material left is import of goods from outside the State of U. P. on 7.3.1995 without declaration form and was to import through a route avoiding the check post with an intention to evade tax.  Tribunal has deleted the penalty. For such an attempt assessing authority levied the penalty under section 15-A(1) (o) of the but this court in Revision nos. 1089 of 1999 and 1155 of 1999 inter parties has set aside the order of the Tribunal and sustained the levy of penalty on the ground that there was an attempt on the part of the dealer to evade tax.  The total amount of such import of goods was about Rs.1, 90,000/-.  In this view of the matter, the order of Tribunal rejecting the books of account and estimating the taxable turnover at Rs.4 Lacs as against the disclosed turnover at Rs.2,06,369/- is up held.

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

Dt:17.01.2006

VS/-


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.