TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 793X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 3.3.2020 and in view of the fact that the service was not effected properly on the revisionist, the order dated 3.3.2020 is set aside. The revisions are allowed in favour of the Assessee and against the Department. - Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. - 119 of 2020, 120 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2020 - Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia, J. For the Revisionist : Nishant Mishra For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons, the facts in Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 119 of 2020 are being referred to. The facts, in brief, are that the revisionist claims to be a Company registered and engaged in manufacturing of M.S. Steel Tubes. It is claimed that the revisionist had closed its business w.e.f. 22.1.2018 and had given the premises on rent to one M/s Mercury Steels. The present proceedings arose from the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respectively. The revisionist did not prefer any appeal against the said order dated 31.7.2009, however, the opposite party preferred an appeal challenging the said order dated 31.7.2009. Counsel for the revisionist argues that the revisionist had closed down its business on 24.9.2015 and the place of the business were shifted to Gautambuddha Nagar and the premises in question was given to vari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... larly Rule 77 and secondly the Appellate order is bad in law as it does not proceed to decide the issue on merits. Even if the revisionist was not present, it was incumbent upon the Appellate Authority to have decided the matter on the basis of material on record and on merits as is clear in the mandate of Rule 68 (4). A bare perusal of the order impugned in the present revision reveals that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
