Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Jay Tech. Printing Systems (Pvt.) Limited Versus Commissioner, U.P. Trade Tax, Lucknow

2016 (8) TMI 1114 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Levy of penalty under the provisions of Section 13-A (4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act 1948 - Held that:- Significantly neither the assessing authority nor for that matter the Tribunal return or record any finding as to whether the goods which were seized had not been accounted for in the books of accounts which were maintained by the assessee. As noted above, both the assessing authority as well as the Tribunal have primarily proceeded to consider a failure on the part of the assessee to establish .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to belong to a bona fide dealer. They were shown to have been duly entered in the books of accounts. How the raw material from which the goods were manufactured entered into the State was a wholly irrelevant consideration and clearly tainted the statutory enquiry beyond repair. - Having embarked upon this exercise, in the opinion of this Court, both the assessing authority as well as the Tribunal completely misdirected the enquiry, which was liable to be undertaken under sub-section (4). It .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

plicant : Krishna Agarwal, Pawan Shree Agarwal For the Opposite Party : S. C. ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned standing counsel. This revision emanates from proceedings taken against the assessee for levy of penalty under the provisions of Section 13-A (4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act 1948. The assessee is said to be engaged in the business of printing of lottery tickets and case making on job work basis. Two consignments being sent by it outside the State of U.P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ority however did not accept the explanation furnished by the assessee and accordingly proceeded to impose penalty in terms of sub section (4) Section 13-A. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee took the matter before the first appellate authority, which held that both the revisionist and entities to whom the goods were dispatched were bona fide registered dealers. It further recorded a categorical finding that the goods which were being dispatched had been duly accounted for in the books of accounts. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ced what in its view was a shifting and vacillating stand of the revisionist inasmuch as while before the assessing authority its assertion was of the goods having been imported into the State under the cover of gate pass Nos. 4 and 13, before the first appellate authority the case set up by the revisionist was that the raw material had been received under gate pass Nos. 3 and 4. On this basis, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the explanation so proffered was not liable to be countenance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The goods not being traceable to a bona fide dealer; (b) A doubt that such goods have not been properly accounted for. Insofar as imposition of penalty is concerned, the same is an order which comes to be passed after the dealer has been put to notice, an explanation obtained from him and upon the authority being satisfied that the goods were omitted from being shown in the accounts, registers and other documents maintained by the dealer. The width, expanse and content of sub sections (1-A) and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oods to a bona fide dealer stands deleted from sub section (4). The doubt on account of which a seizure is effected under sub section (1-A) stands replaced with the satisfaction of the authority that the goods had not been accounted for in the books, registers and other documents of the dealer. Significantly neither the assessing authority nor for that matter the Tribunal return or record any finding as to whether the goods which were seized had not been accounted for in the books of accounts wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version