Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX,U.P.LUCKNOW versus FOOD SPECIALITIES LTD.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner Trade Tax,U.P.Lucknow v. Food Specialities Ltd. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 216 of 1997 [2005] RD-AH 97 (6 January 2005)

 

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.216 OF 1997

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.217 OF 1997

The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow. ....Applicant

Versus

S/S Food Specialties Ltd., New Delhi. ....Opp.party

................

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

These two revisions under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 28.10.1996 for the assessment years 1988-89, by which Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied under section 15-A (1) (o) of the Act.

Applicant had sought Form 34 at the entry check post  in respect of the goods loaded in the vehicle at the T.P. Nagar check post, which was entry check post. However, goods were seized on the ground that in the cartoon different batch number was mentioned than batch number mentioned in the boxes. Goods were subsequently, released on furnishing of security.  In pursuance of the seizure order, authority concerned had levied the penalty under section 15-A (1) (o) of the Act, which was confirmed in first appeal. Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty.

Heard learned Standing Counsel. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party.

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

Tribunal found that the supply was to the military department in pursuance of the order and due to the fact that from the date of manufacturing the period of its sale was going to expire very soon, therefore, on the cartoon different batch number was mentioned but there was no intent to evade the tax, in as much as the good was to be supplied outside the State of U.P. The finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact, which needs no interference. No question of law is involved in the present revision.

In the result, both revisions fail and are accordingly, dismissed.

Dt.06.01.2005

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.