Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (11) TMI 464

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , 1989 accepted the account books as well as the disclosed turnover. But it in respect of certain items rejected the claim of exemption. This order was challenged by the applicant by way of appeal under section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act ). The first appellate authority namely Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) by the order dated February 6, 1990 allowed the appeal in part. He set aside the assessment order under appeal and restored the case to the file of the assessing officer with certain directions, against this order second appeal filed by the applicant before the Tribunal was rejected by the order dated July 11, 1991. The Tribunal rejected the appeal on the finding that undoubtedly the dealer-app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubmission made by the applicant's learned counsel is that instead of passing an assessment order the matter should have been examined either by the first appellate authority or by the Tribunal. Strong reliance has been placed by him on a Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of Munni Lal Vinod Kumar v. Sales Tax Officer [1987] 65 STC 13. He further submitted that once the account books of the applicant were accepted by the assessing authority while framing the assessment order before remand, the said portion of the assessment order has become final and it was no longer open to the assessing authority to re-examine the account books. I have given careful consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the applic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... view of the matter. However, he has placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of Munni Lal Vinod Kumar [1987] 65 STC 13. In the case of Munni Lal Vinod Kumar [1987] 65 STC 13 the controversy involved therein was entirely different. The assessing authority granted exemption on mahua flowers in assessment proceedings but disallowed certain claims of the assessee against which an appeal was filed before the first appellate authority, who remanded the matter and directed the assessing authority to decide the matter in appeal afresh keeping in view the observations made in the appellate order. The assessing authority after remand issued a show-cause notice to the dealer as to why sales tax be not imposed on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h interpreted sections 9 and 10 of the Act as it stood at the relevant time and held as follows (page 94 of STC): Where an order of assessment is set aside by the appellate authority which remands the case to the assessing authority with certain directions for making a fresh assessment, the assessing authority has subject to the carrying out such directions, the same power as it originally had in making the assessment under section 7 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. But where the order of assessment is set aside by a revisional authority under section 10 of the Sales Tax Act, the jurisdiction of the Sales Tax Officer to make the assessment can be circumscribed by the specific directions given by the revisional authority in that regard. If und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing the fresh assessment order after remand. Even then the first appellate authority, in interest of justice by setting aside the ex-parte assessment order has granted further opportunity to the applicant to produce the account books. The order of the first appellate authority is totally in favour of the applicant and it cannot be said that it is in any way prejudicial to the applicant. It appears that the applicant for the reasons best known to it does not want to produce the account books on one pretext or the other and challenged the favourable order dated August 20, 1993 passed by the first appellate authority by way of filing second appeal before the Tribunal and thereafter the present revision, and thus allowed more than 12 years to p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates