High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner Trade Tax Up Lko. v. S/S Narendra Engineers - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 160 of 1999  RD-AH 18766 (6 November 2006)
Court no. 22
Trade Tax Revision no. (160) Of 1999.
The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow..... Revisionist.
S/S Narendra Engineers, Meerut. ... 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 7th October, 1998 relating to the assessment year, 1988-89.
Dealer/Opp. Party is a Civil Contractor and during the year under consideration, executed the contract of a civil nature. Admittedly in the execution of such civil contract, Cement and Iron Steel were used. Dealer claimed that the Cement and Iron Steel were provided by the Engineer, P. W. D., therefore, their turnover were not liable to tax. The Assessing Authority levied the tax on the turnover of Cement and Iron Steel estimated at Rs.90,000/- and Rs.70,000/- respectively on the ground that the dealer was not able to produce any proof that such Iron Steel and Cement were provided by the Engineer P. W. D. and they were tax paid. The First Appellate Authority confirmed the levy of tax on the ground that no evidence have been adduced by the dealer about the said Cement and Iron Steel. The Tribunal has deleted the tax on the turnover of Cement and Iron Steel estimated at Rs.90,000/- and Rs.70,000/- respectively on the ground that the dealer has furnished evidence that they were provided by the P. W. D. and registration number of Executive Engineer, P. W. D. was also mentioned.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the view of the Tribunal is based on no evidence. He submitted that the Assessing Authority and First Appellate Authority had categorically recorded the findings that no evidence has been adduced that the Cement and Iron Steel were provided by the P. W. D. Learned Standing Counsel produced the record to show that even before the Tribunal, no Certificate or any evidence has been filed by the dealer to prove that such Cement and Iron Steel were provided by the P. W. D. Learned Counsel for the dealer relied upon the order of the Tribunal.
I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below. The Assessing Authority and the First Appellate Authority had recorded the categorical finding that no evidence had been adduced in support of the claim that the Cement and the Iron Steel were provided by the P. W. D. and the tax on such purchases have been paid. Record of the Tribunal has also been produced. In the record of Tribunal, there is no Certificate of Executive Engineer, P. W. D. Thus, it is not clear that how the Tribunal has recorded the finding that Certificate shows that Cement and Iron Steel were provided by the Executive Engineer, P. W. D. Finding recorded by the Tribunal is wholly perverse and without any basis. In the circumstances, it is held that the Tribunal has erred in deleting the tax on the turnover of Cement and Iron Steel estimated at Rs.90,000/- and Rs.70,000/- respectively. Levy of tax on the aforesaid items are restored.
In the result, revision is allowed in part. Order of the Tribunal is set aside and the Tribunal is directed to pass appropriate orders under Section 11 (8) of the Act.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.