Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX versus S/S HINDUSTAN SHEEBA GAYGI LTD.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade Tax v. S/S Hindustan Sheeba Gaygi Ltd. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 590 of 1999 [2006] RD-AH 17115 (3 October 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. 43

Trade Tax Revision no. 590 Of 1999.

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

Vs

M/S Hindustan Sheeba Gaygi Ltd., Delh. ... Opp. Party.

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present revision under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 6th, February, 1999 relating to the assessment year, 1994-95, by which, the Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied under Section 13-A (4) of the Act.

The brief facts of the case are, that at the Naraini Check Post Banda, the Vehicle no. U. P. 78-B/0181 with Builty no. 419/1741 dated 22.07.1994 of M/S Economic Transport Organization alongwith 659 Cases of Pesticides was checked while going outside the State of U. P.  It was found that there was no Form 34 alongwith the goods, thus, it was presumed that the goods were loaded inside the State of U. P.   The goods were seized and subsequently released on furnishing of security.  The Trade Tax Officer, Naraini Check Post, Banda passed an ex-parte order under Section 13-A (4) of the Act and levied penalty at Rs.5,20,000/-.  Dealer filed appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Trade Tax, Jhansi.  Before the Appellate Authority, copies of Bill, Builty, Registration Certificate and Sale Register etc. were produced.  A Certificate of Mohan Nagar Check Post was also produced to establish that necessary entries of the goods were made at the Check Post.  It was submitted that the dealer place of business was at AA-13 Mansarovar Park, Shahpura, New Delhi which is about 10-15 Km. away from the Check Post and was registered with Delhi Trade Tax Department.  It was also submitted that the Builty was prepared from the Booking Office of the Transport Company, which is away about 10 Km. from the Check Post.  The goods were coming from Delhi and were going to Raipur (M.P.).  The First Appellate Authority has not accepted the plea of the dealer on the ground that Form-34 was not produced in respect of goods and at the Mohan Nagar Check Post, entries were made in Panji-1 at serial no. 41 and not in Panji-3.  On this basis, it has been inferred that the goods were loaded inside the State of U. P.  Dealer filed Second Appeal before the Tribunal.  The Tribunal by the impugned order, allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty.  The Tribunal held that the dealer was carrying on the business at Delhi and is a registered dealer.  The Tribunal held that the Builty was prepared from the Office of Transporter situated at Chikambarpur, which is no mans land.  The Tribunal further held that the goods were entered in the register of Mohan Nagar Check Post.  On these materials, it has been inferred that the goods have not been loaded inside the State of U. P. and was coming from Delhi and was going to Raipur (M. P.).

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

Despite service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the dealer/opposite party.

I have perused the order of the Tribunal and the authorities below. I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal.  It is not in dispute that the entries of the goods were duly found entered in the register of Mohan Nagar Check Post and the dealer place of business is at Sahadara and the Builty was prepared from the office of Transporter situated at U. P. Border Chikambarpur which is no mans land.  These documents establish that the goods were coming from outside the State of U. P. and there was no reason to disbelieve the claim of the dealer that the goods were loaded at Delhi.  There is absolutely no material to show that the goods were loaded inside the State of U. P. The entries in the record of Mohan Nagar Check Post, Ghaziabad establishes that the goods were coming from Delhi and was going to Raipur (M. P.).  On these facts, the Tribunal has rightly deleted the penalty, which does not require any interference.

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

Dt:03.10.2006.

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.