9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the A.Y. 2001-02, the assessee became entitled to apply for compounding for the A.Y. 2002-03 though on the date of initial rejection of his application for compounding for that year, he was in arrears of compounding fee for the A.Y. 2001-02 ?" 3. The present revision arises for the A.Y. 2002-03. The assessee had operated a brick kiln in that assessment year. Under the instruction issued by the state government under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as the Act, popularly known as the compounding scheme for the A.Y. 2002-03, dated 08.01.2003, the assessee made an application to be admitted to the benefit of that scheme. It also appears that earlier the assessee had made a similar application to be adm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of that fact and in rejecting the appeal filed by the assessee. 7. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that the acceptance of compounding fee is an alternative to the regular mode of assessment and the assessee does not have any inherent or vested right to claim compounding except upon compliance or fulfilment of conditions to seek compounding. In the instant case, in view of the admitted facts noted above, it has been submitted that clearly the assessee was in default towards payment of compounding fee with interest for the A.Y. 2001-02, at least up to the date 14.08.2006 when his compounding application for the A.Y. 2002-03 came to be rejected. The assessee having failed to clear the default for the A.Y. 2001-02, up to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efault for the earlier assessment year, it is difficult to accept that such an application could be allowed in view of the default having survived on the date of rejection of that application. Thus, the assesseee may have had time till his application for compounding of A.Y. 2002-03 was pending to remove the default towards payment of compounding fee for the earlier year. However, that having not been done, the ineligibility to be allowed to pay compounding fee in lieu of tax (on assessment basis), was rightly adjudged against the assessee. 10. Also, the assessee only lost its right to be considered for an alternative to assessment. No prejudice arose since the assessee continued to remain obliged to be assessed to tax, which he otherwise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
