9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 1123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on has been filed by the assessee being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal dated February 16, 2002 passed for the assessment year 1993-94. The question of law referred to is hereunder: (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the rejection of accounts book was justified? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estimate of turnover was justif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded. The goods which were sent for the NOIDA factory were accompanied with a form XXXI but since the lot for Delhi was not to enter into the State of U.P. there was no form XXXI along with it. Accordingly, the assessee was issued a notice under section 28A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act on account of the consignment covered with bill No. 2765 for a sum of Rs. 3,01,117 (this was the consignment, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee to evade tax and his finished goods were fully tax-paid. However, the authorities imposed tax of Rs. 30,000 initially, which was reduced by the Tribunal to Rs. 20,000. The learned counsel for the assessee has relied on a Division Bench decision of this court in the case of Jain Shudh Vanaspati Limited Ghaziabad v. State of U.P. reported in [1983] UPTC 198 wherein the court has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly taxes on the goods manufactured by him, it could not be said that he evaded tax on account of the fact that some raw material was apprehended without form XXXI. For reasons that the assessee was not liable to pay any tax on its raw material, the assessee has relied on a decision of this court in the case of CST v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd. NOIDA reported in [1998] UPTC 642. Thus, in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
