2017 (3) TMI 1646

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tled that in reassessment proceedings, the onus to establish that the disclosure was incorrect, was upon the department, and it could not have been shifted upon the assessee. The onus was otherwise not discharged by the department. The order passed by the Tribunal in reassessment proceeding is not liable to be sustained - revision allowed in favor of assessee.
Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Counsel for Applicant :- Shubham Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C. JUDGMENT Assessee is a registered works contractor and for the assessment year 2002-2003, had been assessed to tax by the authorities under the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The assessment proceedings were concluded. Assessee claimed benefit for purchase of bricks valued at ₹ 26,73 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was only based on suspicion or surmises. Learned counsel further submits that burden of proof in reassessment proceedings was upon the department, which has not been discharged. Learned counsel further contends that the stand of the seller M/s Bhawani Brick Field, Daurala, had itself not been accepted by the same assessing authority, therefore, the stand of the seller, having not been accepted by the department itself, could not have formed a valid basis to initiate reassessment proceedings. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that the authorities were justified in proceeding to initiate reassessment proceedings inasmuch as the transaction of purchase of bricks was found to be factually incorrect, inasmuch the alleged sell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ave been purchased by the applicant on 18.10.2002, falls within the total bricks available with the seller. The order of assessment passed against M/s Bhawani Brick Field, Daurala is by the same assessing authority and has not been denied. The Tribunal has not considered this aspect of the matter and has merely shifted the burden upon the assessee to prove purchase of such bricks. A further finding has been returned that this burden has not been discharged by the assessee. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court finds that for reassessment proceedings, once the basis to discard the figures disclosed by the assessee had not been accepted by the department itself, the authorities were not justified in relying upon dis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X