9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 864X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 12,71,395/- was imposed in respect of such sales. It appears that at the time hearing of the first appeal, the assessee filed two Forms 3-C (2) Nos. 231973 and 031342 issued by M/s. Shas Kant Anand Kumar, a registered dealer. Through said forms the purchasing dealer had purchased foodgrains worth ₹ 42,43,875/- and ₹ 42,43,775/-. The first appellate authority sent the two forms for verification. On receipt of information from the Assessing Authority concerned the benefit of the forms claimed by the assessee was refused on the ground that the dealer issuing the said declaration had not furnished details of use of forms issued to him, that one Form 3-C (2) No. 231973 was issued by the said dealer to M/s. Kanahaiya Lal Badr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not produce the forms at the time of assessment and the possibility of the forms having been obtained subsequently cannot be ruled out. 6. The assessment order was passed by the Assessing Authority on 27th February, 1997. Form Nos. 231973 and 031342 were issued to the revisionist on 1st March, 1994 and 15th May, 1995 respectively. However, the dealer had furnished an explanation that there was some dispute with regard to the family partition between the brothers and the forms in question were in custody of brother of the dealer on account of which the declaration forms could not be produced. However, their number was mentioned in the list of Forms 3-C (2) against which sales were made. There is no finding that the dealer had not given t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dealer, it cannot be said that the present revisionist had in any manner colluded with the purchasing dealer. Similarly, once it is proved that the necessary forms were issued by the Department and they were utilised by the purchasing dealer prior to cancellation of registration, the benefit claimed by the selling dealer under such declarations cannot be denied. It is really unfortunate that both the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal has ignored well settled law in this regard. The orders passed by the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal are not only against the well settled principles of law but also perverse. It may also be observed that the Trade Tax authorities do not appear to have taken any action against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
