Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

S/S GIRDHAR SINGH INT BHATTHA versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


S/S Girdhar Singh Int Bhattha v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 933 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 15294 (4 September 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.22

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.933 of 2006

S/S Girdhar Singh Int Bhattha, Chhapari, Ghazipur.                               Applicant

Versus

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 is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 9th May, 2006 relating to the assessment year, 2000-2001.

The applicant was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of bricks. The dispute relates to the second season only. According to the applicant, it had operated the kiln from 20th January, 2001 to 4th February, 2001 for 16 days. The information of the closure of the firing was given on 7th March, 2001 vide receipt no. 3586. Applicant has not maintained any books of account. Assessing authority has estimated the firing period for 40 days, which has been confirmed by the first appellate authority and also by the Tribunal. Tribunal, however, given relief on the production and the selling rate.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the firing was closed due to the reason that kiln was situated near the canal and due to dampness the firing was not carried out properly. He submitted that at the time of survey dated 3rd February, 2001 only three tones of coal was found, therefore, there was no reason to the authorities below to dispute the closure of the firing from 4th February, 2001 and to assess the firing at 40 days.

I do not find any substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant. Normally, the firing starts from January and end up to June. If the applicant disputes the closure of the firing, burden lies on it to establish its claim. Admittedly, in the present case, the applicant has not maintained any books of account, thus, he was not able to substantiate its firing from 20th January, 2001 to 4th February, 2001. Survey was made on 3rd February, 2001. It appears that nothing has been said that the applicant was going to close its firing. There appears to be no reason to give the information after 32 days. Thus, assessing authority rejected the firing period and by way of best judgment assessment estimated the firing period at 40 days such estimate cannot be said to be arbitrary and without any basis.

No other point has been argued.

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

Dated.04.09.2006.

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.