9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 864X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar dated 04.6.2007 issued by the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow, respondent no.2 (enclosed as Annexure-3 to this petition). (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 31.3.2008 passed by respondent no.3 in so far as it relates to imposition of State Development Tax (Annexure-4 & 5 to the writ petition) for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. (iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued restraining/ prohibiting the respondent no.3 from demanding any payment of State Development Tax in addition to the amount of 1% and 2% which has already been deducted from the payment of the petitioners." Shri Bharat Ji Agrawal informs the Court that the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State of U.P. filed a Special Leave to Appeal against the judgment in the Supreme Court, which has disposed of the Civil Appeal No.1843 of 2013 by its judgment dated 26th February, 2013 reported in 2013 NTN (Vol.51) 258. The Supreme Court confirmed the judgment and order passed by the High Court for the reasons stated in its judgment, in paragraphs 22, 23, 24 and 25 of the judgment quoted as below:- "22. As we have already noticed, Section 7-D of the Act provides for composition of amount at an agreed rate on the turnover of the dealer, in lieu of taxes payable by the dealer under the Act. Firstly, offer would be made by the assessee and the same requires to be accepted by the assessing authority and then only there would be a concluded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax under Section 7-D of the Act are also expected to pay the State Development Tax. This, in our opinion, is fallacious view of the Commissioner. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes could have issued the circular only if there is a change in the rate of tax. There is difference between the "change in the rate of tax" and introduction of altogether a new provision or new kind of tax for levy and collection from the dealers. 23. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we cannot sustain the circular instructions issued by the Commissioner dated 04.06.2007 and, therefore, the same requires to be set aside. Accordingly, we confirm the judgment and order passed by the High Court for the reasons stated by us. 24. Now, we leave it open to the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at liberty to question the same before the appropriate forum. The questions in this writ petition have been adjudicated by this Court and the Supreme Court in the judgments cited as above. As the circular instructions issued by the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. dated 4.6.2007 has already been quashed, no further orders are required to be made in this regard. So far as imposition of State Development Tax, in the orders dated 31.3.2008 passed by respondent no.3 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 in respect of the petitioner is concerned, the same is set aside with the similar liberty to the assessing authorities as given in paragraph 24 of the judgment of the Supreme Court whether to demand the State Development Tax from those dea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
