Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX,U.P.LUCKNOW versus S/S BHARTIYA CHARMODHYOG SANGH, SANGH, SAKET COLONY AGRA

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 Bhartiya Charmodhyog Sangh, Sangh, Saket Colony Agra - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 197 of 1998 [2006] RD-AH 14097 (22 August 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

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

The Assessing Authority levied tax on the imported Leather and Sheets, which were supplied to the manufacturer of Shoes.  Claim of the dealer was that it could not charge any amount for the aforesaid supplies.  The Tribunal following the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax Versus M/S K. Exports Pvt. Ltd., Agra reported in 1984 UPTC page 721, deleted the tax..  

The following three questions have been raised in the present revisions:-

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to grant exemption to the opposite party dealer inspite of the fact that the dealer had not sold the goods manufactured in big factories and purchase against Form 3-A ?

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to allow the exemption inspite of ;the fact that the goods sold by the opposite party dealer were not the product of village industries as they were not manufactured by the petty artisans ?

3. Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified in allowing exemption pursuant to Notification no. 7037 dated 31.1.85 issued under U. P. Act relating to interstate sale ?

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

In my opinion, all the aforesaid three questions do not arise from the order of the Tribunal.

In the result, revision nos. 197 of 1998 and (471) of 1998 fail, and are, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt:22.08.2006.

MZ/-.


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.