Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S KISAN INT UDYOG, SAHARANPUR versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Kisan Int Udyog, Saharanpur v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1205 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17628 (12 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.22

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.1205 of 2006

M/S Kisan Int Udyog, Saharanpur.             Applicant

Versus

Commissioner, 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 22nd June, 2006 relating to the assessment year, 2000-2001.

The applicant was engaged in the business of manufacture and sales of bricks. Admittedly, the applicant was under the compounding scheme upto 30th September, 2000. The present revision relates to the period subsequent to 1.10.2000. It appears that the applicant has given application under the compounding scheme for the period 1.10.2000 to 30.09.2001. In the application, in the column of opening stock " as per survey" was mentioned. Since the application was filed beyond time, it was rejected and, therefore, the applicant was subjected to assessment under section 7 of the Act for the assessment year, 2000-2001 for the period 1.10.2000 to 31. 03.2001. During the assessment proceeding, as per the books of account the applicant has disclosed the opening stock at 22,355 bricks. Assessing authority has taken the opening stock of 1, 25,000 bricks on the ground that in the compounding application, in the column of opening stock, the applicant has mentioned " as per survey" and has not disclosed the opening stock and turnover has been estimated taking the opening stock at 1,25,000 bricks. This view of the assessing authority has been confirmed in first appeal and by the Tribunal.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the estimate of the opening stock at 1,25,000 bricks is arbitrary and without any basis. I find substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant. Merely because in the compounding application, in the column of opening stock " as per survey" was mentioned by mistake the stock disclosed as per books of account at 22,355 bricks cannot be rejected. There appears to be no justification for estimating the opening stock at 1,25,000 bricks, which is arbitrary and without any basis.

No other point has been argued.

For the reasons stated above, the order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside.

In the result, revision is allowed in part. The order of the Tribunal is set-aside only to the extent stated above. Tribunal is directed to pass appropriate orders under section 11 (8) of the Act and estimate the turnover taking the opening stock at 22.355 bricks.

Dated.12.10.2006

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.