Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED, GHAZIABAD versus THE COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, UP., LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Steel Authority Of India Limited, Ghaziabad v. The Commissioner Of Trade Tax, Up., Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 404 of 2001 [2007] RD-AH 5656 (29 March 2007)

 

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.404 of 2001.

Steel Authority of India Limited, Ghaziabad.    Applicant

Versus

The 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 27th February, 2001 relating to the assessment year, 1979-80.

The applicant was engaged in the business of Iron and Steel. The only dispute involved in the present revision relates to the claim of full exemption on the turnover of Rs.25,88,369/- against Form 3-B. The claim of full exemption has been disallowed and only partial exemption was allowed on the ground that the Form 3-B furnished by the applicant related to the partial exemption and not full exemption. Dealer was not able to adduce any evidence that the said Form 3-B was for full exemption and any kind of the declaration on the part of the purchaser declaring that the Form 3-B was for full exemption. The view of the assessing authority has been upheld by the Tribunal.

Heard Sri Piyush Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel..

I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal. Section 4-B of the Act provides full exemption as well as partial exemption. Full exemption is available to certain items as per the notification, therefore, for the claim of exemption, it is on the dealer to prove that the purchaser holds a valid recognition certificate for full exemption and the Form 3-B issued was relating to the full exemption and  unless it is found that the Form 3-B was issued for full exemption the same cannot be allowed. In the present case, authorities below have held that Form 3-B was for partial exemption and not for full exemption. No evidence has been adduced to prove that the purchaser was entitled for full exemption and had issued Form 3-B for full exemption. In absence of such evidence, the claim of full exemption has  been rightly been denied.

In these circumstances, revision is devoid of any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dated.29.03.2007.

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.