Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S. HARE KRISHAN AGARWAL versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S. Hare Krishan Agarwal v. Commissioner Of Trade Tax, U.P. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 135 of 1996 [2004] RD-AH 1161 (14 October 2004)

 

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

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.135 OF 1996

M/S Hare Krishan Agarwal, Farrukhabad. ....Applicant

Versus

Trade Tax Commissioner, U.P. ....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 11.09.1995 relating to the assessment year 1981-82.

Tribunal has decided the appeal ex-parte. Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that since the counsel was ill, therefore, he has send a telegram on 30.08.1995 for the adjournment, which has not been considered and ex-parte order has been passed. He further submitted that dispute before the Tribunal was about the rate of tax on the turn over of aluminum powder and barium nitrade. He submitted that in the assessment years 1979-80 and 80-81, both the aforesaid items have been treated as mineral and no reason has been given for not treating the aforesaid two items as mineral in the year under consideration and taxed it as chemical.

I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below.

Tribunal has referred in the order that in the assessment years 1979-80 and 80-81aluminum powder and barium nitrade have been treated as mineral. Tribunal has not given any reason that why in this year these items can not be treated as mineral and can be taxed as chemical. Therefore, order of the Tribunal is set aside. Matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh in accordance to the law.

In the result, revision is allowed. Order of Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh.

Dt.14.10.2004

R./


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.