Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ACTO, Ward-II, Circle-G, Jaipur Versus Pankaj Udyog, Bani Park, Jaipur

2016 (12) TMI 312 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Set off of tax - the respondent assessee is a manufacturer and purchased raw material during the assessment year 1994-95 after paying full tax @ 4% and as per the Notification, claimed set off @ 2.5% on such purchases made within the State of Rajasthan. Originally the Assessing Officer allowed the said set off, however, the same was reopened and in the reassessment order, after taking into consideration the objections, allowed set off of 1% only - Held that: - The Tax Board, in my view, has righ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e the Notification has correctly been applied, no question of law can be said to arise out of the impugned order as it is a finding of fact - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 497 of 2011 - Dated:- 4-11-2016 - Jainendra Kumar Ranka, J. For the Petitioner : R. B. Mathur, Meenal Ghiya For the Respondent : V. K. Gogra ORDER 1. Instant petition is directed against order dt 7.5.2002 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, in appeal No.129/2002/J .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

et off of 1% only. 3. The matter was assailed before the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), who also upheld the finding of the AO, however, on a further appeal, the Tax Board took into consideration the Notification dt 6.3.1991 by which it came to the conclusion that set off is required to be allowed @ 2.5% and accordingly granted relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Tax Board failed to take into consideration the Notification dt 27.3.1995 by which only 1% set off was allowa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was relied upon by the Tax Board was operative even when the said Notification dt 27.3.1995 came into operation and was rescinded in the year 1995 and was operative till the assessment year 1994-95, which is under challenge, and supported the order of Tax Board. 6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. It would be appropriate to quote the Circular :- "S.No.523 : F.4(8)FD/Gr.IV/91-111 dated 6.3.1991 In exerci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version