9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (11) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... every such case, upon the additional evidence being taken on record, reasonable opportunity for challenge or rebuttal shall be given to the Commissioner. " 2.. In the instant case the applicant-revisionist sold certain goods to the tune of Rs. 1,25,818.50 but did not file form III-C(5) (which has been mentioned as form III-D in the order of Tribunal) before assessing authority. As according to the revisionist-applicant the same was not available to him at the relevant time, the said form was filed at the stage of second appeal before the U.P. Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow Bench. The said additional evidence which was sought to be produced by the revisionist was not admitted by the Tribunal during the pendency of second appeal. The appeal wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee satisfies that it was not within his reach to file the document at the stage of assessment or at the stage of first appeal, then in the second appeal the document can be admitted. The assessee has indicated the reason that in spite of his best efforts he could not get the form within the prescribed time and as soon as it was available, it was sought to be filed. In support of that contention an affidavit was filed. From the order, it transpires that the said allegation was not rebutted on behalf of the taxing authority by filing a counter-affidavit but it was only asserted that form III-C was not produced within the time prescribed for giving evidence, hence it cannot be admitted at the stage of second appeal. 6.. It is the matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sary relief." 8.. In Rajendra Prasad Mahura Prasad v. Commissioner of Sales Tax 1984 UPTC 1274 it was held: "The first appellate court did not consider the forms III-C filed by the assessee on the ground that they were not filed before the assessing authority. The case of the assessee was that the forms, which were filed before the appellate authority had not been received by him before the assessment was completed and as such he could not file it before the assessing authority. The second appellate court, i.e., the Tribunal also refused to consider the aforesaid forms III-C filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not taken any such ground in the memorandum of appeal and as such he was debarred from adding the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tage but it is well-settled that the discretion which is vested to authority should be exercised in a fair, just and reasonable manner. If the said form was not available to the applicant-revisionist at the time when the assessment was made or at the first appellate stage, and the revisionist-applicant got it only when he filed the second appeal, then there existed no justification for the Tribunal to refuse to admit that document. It may be said that the revisionist-applicant could not indicate sufficient reasons in his application and the affidavit for producing the additional evidence earlier but at least it was said that the required form was not available and when it was available or it could be made available, it was filed. The said a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
