9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 404 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxPurchase tax on the purchase of paddy relying on Supreme Court decision - U.P. Trade Tax Act - Held that - The Tribunal vide its impugned orders have deleted the addition in each case by observing that the obiter of the Hon ble Apex Court is not pertaining to the State Trade Tax Act as it is related to the Central Sales Tax. Notification No. 2947 dated 11.12.1995 issued by the Government of U.P. has specifically granted the exemption from the tax on the purchase of paddy. So, each addition was deleted.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 10(B) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 1999-00. 2. Validity of assessment order dated 2.7.2007. 3. Appeal against the first appeal order dated 5.3.2008. 4. Second appeal bearing Appeal No.38 of 2010 for Assessment Year 1999-00. 5. Filing of revision under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. 6. Application of judgment and order dated 12.12.2012 in Trade Tax Revision Defective No.127 of 2011 to the present case. Analysis: 1. The controversy in the case pertains to the assessment year 1999-00 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act. A notice under Section 10(B) of the Act was issued to the assessee, who responded, leading to the assessment order dated 2.7.2007. The revisionist filed a first appeal, partly allowed by the Appellate Tribunal, Faizabad. Subsequently, the assessee filed a second appeal, which was allowed by the U.P. Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bench-I, Gorakhpur. The present revision under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was filed by the Commissioner, Commercial Trade Tax, Lucknow, challenging the previous orders. 2. The Tribunal, in its impugned orders, deleted the addition made by the Joint Commissioner under Section 10(B) of the Trade Tax Act on the purchase of paddy by the assessee. The Tribunal reasoned that the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court were not applicable to the State Trade Tax Act and that a specific government notification granted exemption from tax on the purchase of paddy. The Tribunal found the notification favorable to the assessees and held that the addition made was unjustified. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the notification favored the assessees and the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court were properly distinguished and not applicable in this case. 3. The Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, found no reason to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal. It upheld the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition made by the Joint Commissioner and dismissed all revisions filed by the Department, as they lacked merit. The Court relied on the reasoning provided in a previous judgment and order dated 12.12.2012, which dealt with similar matters, to dismiss the present revision in line with the previous decision. 4. The Court, with the consent of the parties, disposed of the revision finally at the admission stage. The revision was dismissed based on the reasoning given in the previous judgment and order dated 12.12.2012. The prayer made by the revisionist was not disputed by the counsel for the assessee, leading to the dismissal of the revision. The Court maintained the decision of the Tribunal and upheld the exemption granted to the assessees on the purchase of paddy, as per the government notification.
|
