Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (4) TMI 512

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed:- "A. Whether in light of judgement of Hon'ble S.C. in Mathuram Agarwal case it is right to exclude Gambier from the category of item kaththa, when the item Kaththa is not defined under U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948? B. Whether the Gambier (Uncaria Gambier) is known as WHITE KATHTHA or not? C. Whether the category Kaththa under the U.P. TRADE TAX ACT, 1948 is not divided in to two groups that is BLACK KATHTHA and second the WHITE KATHTHA. D. Whether the order passed under sec.59 of U.P. VAT ACT, 2008 can be apply to initiate re-assessment proceeding under Sec. 21 (2) of U.P. TRADE TAX ACT, 1948? E. Whether if any item under Section 59 of U.P. VAT ACT, 2008 declared it as unclassified, it is also deemed to be unclassified under U.P. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uit (All) 2155, the re-assessment proceedings under Section 21 (2) of the Act cannot be initiated. 4. He further submits that gambier is treated as kaththa which is evident from the registration certificate and it has neither been modified nor been cancelled nor any action on date has been initiated against the said certificate. So the proceeding of re-assessment is bad. He further submits that rate of tax on kaththa has been specifically provides in the entry for levy of tax @ 4 %. The said entry covers all kinds of kaththa and therefore, prays for allowing the revision. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel supports the order of the authorities below. He further relied upon the counter affidavit wherein the order inte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and knowledge knows that he will be trading in gambier and not kaththa. Had it not been so, the dealer must have got its registration certificate amended by getting it correct as kaththa. He further submits that it is not a case of change of opinion but it is a clear case of assessing the tax at the lower rate than what it is assessable under the Act i.e. as unclassified item because the gambier was being imported in the garb of kaththa. He further submits that once an order inter-party is passed by this Court, the applicant was not justified in saying that kaththa has been imported and tax has rightly been imposed at the lower rate of 4 % . He prays for dismissal of the revision. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Cour....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in 2017 UPTC 63, in paragraph nos. 11, 14 & 15, has held as under:- "11. Further, a subsequent judgment cannot be used to reopen assessments or disturb past assessments which have been concluded. [See Para 7, Austin Engineering V. JCIT (2009) 312 ITR 70 (Guj.) Para 4 and 5, Bear Shoes 2011 (331) ITR 435 (Mad.), B.J. Services Co. Middle East Ltd. v. Deputy Director (2011) 339 ITR 169 (Uttarakhand), Sesa Goa V. JCIT 2007 (294) ITR 101 (Bom.), Geo Miller and Co. 2004 (134) Taxmann 552 (Cal)]. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MEPCO Industries V. CIT, (2010) 1 SCC 434, where the CIT on the basis of a subsequent decision of the Supreme Court sought to rectify his earlier order. The Hon'ble Court....