Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW versus S/S RAJEEVA AGRAWAL

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow v. S/S Rajeeva Agrawal - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1961 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 14420 (25 August 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

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

The only dispute raised in the present revision relates to the purchase of Mahua for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal.  Before the Assessing Authority, dealer had furnished complete details of the purchases made for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal,  namely purchase orders, date of purchase, 6-R, 9-R, Gate Pass, bags, weight, value and other expenses etc.  No reason whatsoever was given by the Assessing Authority for rejecting the claim of the purchases in the course of inter-State for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal, but the tax had been assessed on the purchases of Mahua, treating it as intra-State sale.  In First Appeal, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Authority.  Dealer filed Second Appeal before the Tribunal.  The Tribunal allowed the appeal and accepted the plea of the dealer.  The Tribunal held that the complete details were furnished by the dealer in respect of the purchases made for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal, which were not found incorrect. No reason whatsoever had been given by the Assessing Authority for rejecting the claim of the dealer.  First Appellate Authority has illegally remanded back the case to the Assessing Authority.  The Tribunal accordingly accepted the claim of the dealer relating to the purchases made for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal on the facts and circumstances of the case.  I do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal.  The perusal of assessment order shows that complete details relating to the purchases for and on behalf of Ex- U. P. Principal and its dispatch outside the State of U. P. at the destination of Ex- U. P. Principal were furnished, in which, no defect was found.  In the circumstances, no interference is called for.

In the result, revision fails, and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt:23.8.2006.

MZ/1961/04.


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.