9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der clause (iii) of the said notification, as his case was a payment of rebate being allowed to the full extent at the rate of five per cent. This was allowed to him for having paid entry tax at the rate of five per cent. Because the assessee had paid entry tax at the rate of five per cent he was given the benefit of not having to pay the State development tax. The other clauses are not connected with the rebate factor at all. The claim made by the assessee under section 3H(4)(d) should have been allowed. The order of the Tribunal is, therefore, set aside. Revision allowed. - Writ Petition No. 8073 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2011 - ALAM S.R. C.J. AND ALOK ARADHE, J. G.N. Purohit, Senior Advocate with Abhishek Oswal for the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing authority having held that the kraft paper was sold to the manufacturer holding the recognition certificate under section 4B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the time was also given for furnishing the form IIIB no State development tax was payable by the applicant in view of sub-clause (i) of Notification No. 1307 dated April 28, 2005 and the Tribunal has committed an error of law in upholding the levy of State development tax on the ground that after each clauses (i) to (iv) the word 'or' has not been used? (4) Whether in view of section 3H(4)(d) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act it is only the goods alone which is required to be specified in the notification in respect of which the State development tax shall not be payable? (5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h 7, 2005 under section 5 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act providing rebate to the extent of amount of tax paid under the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000. Thus, the assessing authority also recorded a finding that the assessee had deposited the entire entry tax at the full rate but did not admit any liability for payment of State development tax under section 3H of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. Thus, it was the assessee's case that the assessee was not liable to pay any State development tax under section 3H of the Act especially in view of the notification dated April 28, 2005 issued by the State Government. The notification dated April 28, 2005 is quoted herein below: KA.NI.-2-1307/XI-9(81)/91-U.P.Act-15-48-0rder-(23)-2005 Lucknow: Dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly come to the conclusion that one condition is connected to the other, that cannot be the case because every clause refers to specify benefits under specific sections and gives specific relief. The case of the assessee is covered under clause (iii) of the said notification, as his case was a payment of rebate being allowed to the full extent at the rate of five per cent. This was allowed to him for having paid entry tax at the rate of five per cent. Because the assessee had paid entry tax at the rate of five per cent he was given the benefit of not having to pay the State development tax. The other clauses are not connected with the rebate factor at all. Thus, in view of the above, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal has come to a wro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
