Allahabad High Court
M/S Bankey Lal Anil Kumar Bijnor vs Addl. Commissioner Grade-1 Commercial ... on 8 August, 2019
Bench: Bharati Sapru, Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 183 of 2017 Petitioner :- M/S Bankey Lal Anil Kumar Bijnor Respondent :- Addl. Commissioner Grade-1 Commercial Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned Special Counsel for the respondents-State.
Pleadings have been exchanged and this matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself.
The facts of the case are that the re-assessment proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2012-13. The re-assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information gathered during the survey conducted on 22.02.2015 for which the petitioner avers no material or information was discovered pertaining to the relevant years of assessment in question.
Two counter affidavits have been filed including a better counter affidavit sworn by Neelesh Kumar Kharvar, Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax/State Tax and in paragraph no.4 he has made the following averments:-
"That, on a survey dated 22.02.2015 conducted by the Special Investigation Branch it was found that petitioner was giving crushers on hire and the said crushers were power driven. Copy of Survey is already on record as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition and at the time to same survey certain challans were seized which were clearly revealed that petitioner has a vertical power can crushers. The photo copies of certain challans seized at the time of survey dated 22.02.2015 are being filed herewith and marked as Annexure C.A.-1 collectively to this affidavit."
In support of the contentions as made in the counter affidavit, the State has also filed certain documents, which are appended as Annexure C.A.-1. A perusal of the documents, which have been appended as Annexure C.A.-1, also reflect that the same do not pertain to the period for which the re-assessment was made. Thus, really speaking there is nothing on record to show from the side of the State that any cogent material was found for the period in question in order to send the notices for re-assessment.
From a reading of contents of paragraph no.4 of the counter affidavit it is abundantly clear that the respondents are unable to state with clarity whether the material found during the survey pertained to the assessment years in question or not.
On being questioned, learned Special Counsel for the department is unable to answer whether they were materials for the relevant assessment years. It appears that some loose material was found. The contentions of the petitioner, therefore, stands un-rebutted.
In view of the above, the relief sought by the petitioner is granted. The sanction orders issued by the respondent no.1, under Section 29 (7) of the U.P. VAT Act for the Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are hereby quashed.
The Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
Order Date :- 8.8.2019 S.P.