Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S RANVIR ENTERPRISES, GHAZIABAD. versus COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U. P. LUCKNOW.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Ranvir Enterprises, Ghaziabad. v. Commissioner of Sales TAx, U. P. Lucknow. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 271 of 1994 [2006] RD-AH 1852 (24 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

Sales Tax Revision no. 271 of 1994.

M/S Ranvir Enterprises, Ghaziabad.                       .......... .......Revisionist.                    

Vs

Commissioner of Sales Tax U. P.     Lucknow......................Respondent.

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

The present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as Act) is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 3.111993 relating to the assessment years 1984-85.

Applicant was holding a Recognition Certificate under Section 4-B and during the year under consideration, applicant had made total purchases of raw-material at Rs.2,55,279/- and out of which, purchases against Form 3-B was at Rs.1,70,995.56 Paise.  According to the Tribunal, total purchases against Form 3-B was 67% of the total purchases and therefore, the quantum of sale of goods within U. P. and in the course of interstate sales should be 67% which according to the Tribunal comes to Rs.1,86,982.26 Paise while the applicant had disclosed total sales within the State of U. P. at Rs.73,573.01. According to the Tribunal in respect of Rs.1,13,409.25, applicant had violated the provisions of Section 4-B.  Tribunal accordingly confirmed the penalty at Rs.25,000/-.

Heard Counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the applicant is not able to assail the finding of Tribunal.  Finding of Tribunal is the finding of Fact.

In the result, revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Dt:06.8.2004.

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.