Allahabad High Court
Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow vs Sunil Cance Crusher Tanda Bijnor on 11 January, 2010
Author: Bharati Sapru
Bench: Bharati Sapru
Court No. - 30 Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 311 of 2002 Petitioner :- Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow Respondent :- Sunil Cance Crusher Tanda Bijnor Petitioner Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.
Heard learned standing counsel for the revisionist State. This revision has been filed by the State under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 1990-91 against an order of the Tribunal dated 4.2.2002.
The sole question of law referred is as under:
"(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified in accepting the account books in case of Khand & Gur Badda, while rejecting the same in case of lime (chuna), on the basis of adverse fact found at the time of survey dated 30.1.91 and ignoring the pronouncement given by the Hon'ble High Court in following cases:
(a) M/s. Kuber Trading Company C/O Vs. C.S.T. S.T.I. 1979 All. High Court - 166.
(b) M/s.Ahmad Coal Traders vs. C.S.T. 1987 U.P.T.C. 165.
(c) C.S.T. vs. Khursheed Ahmad, Deoria, 1983 U.P.T.C. 536.
(d) M/s. Sardar Amar Singh vs. CST 1984 U.P.T.C. 1003.
(e) M/s. Raja Rice Mill vs. C.S.T. 2000 NTN (16) 86.
(2) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal has properly utilized the material available on record?"
The Tribunal has after examining the matter reduced the turnover of the assessee in respect of the two items.
In view of the said discussion, the order passed by the tribunal is justified. As such no question of law arises. I see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the tribunal.
The revision is dismissed as above. No costs.
Order Date :- 11.1.2010 rk