Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1994 (9) TMI 330

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the assessee and thereby setting aside his earlier order dismissing the dealer's appeal and allowing the same. I have heard the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned Standing Counsel. The proceedings arise out of the dealer's assessment to Central sales tax for the assessment year 1974-75. The original assessment for the aforesaid year was made by order dated June 30, 1978, by which the Central sales tax were determined at Rs. 14,39,147.40. Out of this, sales to the extent of Rs. 14,32,829.07 were covered by form "C" and were taxed at the rate of 3 per cent, while sales of Rs. 6,317.43 were without form "C" and were taxed at the rate of 10 per cent. Thereafter, the Sales Tax Officer discovered that the totalling of the s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ural implements were taxable only at the rate of 3 per cent which was the tax already assessed and, therefore, there was no need of rectification of the assessment order. The learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Sales Tax, allowed the application of the assessee by an order dated September 1, 1983. and rectifying his earlier order dated October 24, 1981, he ordered the dealer's first appeal to be allowed. Against the order aforesaid, the Commissioner of Sales Tax filed a second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal and the Tribunal decided the two appeals-the one preferred by the assessee against the confirmation of penalty and the other preferred by the Commissioner of Sales Tax against the order dated September 1, 1983-by the impugned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... P. Sales Tax Act was amended and entries 1 and 52 were substituted with the following entries: "1. Agricultural implements, other than implements worked by human or animal power and water pumps, but including their parts and accessories other than tyres and tubes." "52. Machinery and spare parts of machinery, including water pumps not being such machinery or spare parts thereof as are taxable under any other item in this Schedule." Thus, for the purposes of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, water pumps were excluded from the category of agricultural implements and were included in the category of machinery. The Tribunal has also referred to the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1975, by which entries relating to agricultural implem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... been overruled by the honourable Supreme Court of India in Second Appeals Nos. 996 and 997 of 1975, State of Uttar Pradesh v. Engineering Traders, decided by order dated February 10, 1988. He has placed a copy of the aforesaid judgment before me which shows that the aforesaid Full Bench judgment of this Court was set aside because of the amendments made by the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act by which the relevant provisions of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were amended with retrospective effect. The honourable Supreme Court did not upset and reverse the view taken by the Full Bench of this Court that water pumping sets are by their very nature agricultural implements. Because of the legislative enactment, the honourable Supreme Cour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tax Revision No. 448 of 1988, which arises out of penalty proceedings, the revisionist was patently guilty of furnishing incorrect particulars of its turnover in so far as it included in the category of sales covered by form "C", substantial sales amounting to Rs. 1,16,500 which were not so covered. Therefore, it had made a default within the meaning of section 15-A(1)(c) of the U.P. Act, but it cannot be burdened with any liability because by doing so, no amount of tax could have been avoided, the sales in either case being taxable at the same rate. A default of concealing or furnishing inaccurate particulars of turnover is punishable by a penalty of a sum not less than 50 per cent, but not exceeding 200 per cent of the amount of tax which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates