9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal jurisdiction is not inclined to make any other estimation. The finding, thus, with regard to rejection of accounts book and estimation of turnover being pure finding of fact does not call for interference in revisional jurisdiction. The authorities below have not recorded any finding with regard to the ingenuity of the form F. From the perusal of section 6A of the Act, if the burden had been discharged it would be deemed to be stock transfer. Since all the transactions of stock transfer were covered by form F submitted by the dealer and issued by the principal officer of other place after obtaining them from prescribed authority which in this case was the State of Delhi, the claim of the dealer that stock transfer would not have be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the survey made on January 28, 1999 and estimated the total taxable turnover to be Rs. 91,95,988 and raised a demand of Rs. 5,75,718 on such turnover. This order of assessment dated January 22, 2002 contained certain mistakes apparent on the face of record. Accordingly, application was filed by the dealer under section 22 of the Act. The assessing officer passed fresh order on April 29, 2002 under section 22 of the Act and reduced the demand of tax to be Rs. 5,42,266. Under the Central Act, the assessing officer again made an estimate of turnover to the tune of Rs. 3,38,58,827 and determined a tax liability of Rs. 24,76,334. Here again an application under section 22 of the Act was filed and the tax liability was reduced by Rs. 63, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e eyes of law? (vii) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified in law in not considering the submission of the applicant/revisionist? (viii) Whether in any view of the matter the order of the Tribunals just and proper seeing the fact and circumstances of the present case? State Act: (i) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified in law in confirming the rejection of books of account and also the best judgement assessment order passed by the assessing authority? (ii) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified in law in determining the taxable turnover in most excessive and even recording favourable findings in favour of revisionist, even then rejecting the same? (iii) Whether the Trade Tax Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments indicated that actually it was not the case of stock transfer from the factory of the dealer situate in the State of U. P. at Noida to its head office at Delhi. It was further recorded by the assessing officer that the documents which were seized apparently showed all the sales had been made from the Noida office only inasmuch as the blank challan book of Delhi office was recovered from the office at Noida and also 63 loose challan were found which had been filled up in the hand writing of Mr. Madan Mohan Sharma, employee of the dealer posted at Delhi. This finding of the assessing authority has been affirmed up to the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the dealer has submitted that the explanation tendered by the dealer has not been ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not in dispute that any of the form F submitted by the dealer was either found to be incorrect, forged, fabricated or did not fulfil the requirement of law so as to entail their rejection. The authorities below have not recorded any finding with regard to the ingenuity of the form F. From the perusal of section 6A of the Act, if the burden had been discharged it would be deemed to be stock transfer. Since all the transactions of stock transfer were covered by form F submitted by the dealer and issued by the principal officer of other place after obtaining them from prescribed authority which in this case was the State of Delhi, the claim of the dealer that stock transfer would not have been rejected appears to be correct. Thus, the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifference, the view taken by the authorities below in rejecting the accounts book while determining the liability under the U.P. Trade Tax Act cannot be said to be unjustified. In any case all the three authorities have considered the material on record and have affirmed the rejection of accounts book. Further some relief have been granted by the appellate authority and further more by the Tribunal which is their estimation. This court in revisional jurisdiction is not inclined to make any other estimation. The finding, thus, with regard to rejection of accounts book and estimation of turnover being pure finding of fact does not call for interference in revisional jurisdiction. Thus the revision under the State Act is liable to be dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
