2020 (3) TMI 824

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bunal has recorded the fact that Form 3-D was submitted by means of an application under Section 12B of the Act before the Tribunal for acceptance of the said Form and to grant benefit of the same to the revisionist. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that form 3-D was pertaining to assessment year 2002-03, where as the assessment pertains to the year 1998-99 and therefore Forms have been procured by the revisionist after two years of the assessment, therefore, benefit of the same cannot be granted to the revisionist. Revision dismissed.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. For Revisionist : Praveen Kumar For Opposite Party : C.S.C. ORDER Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Sr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h the order of the first appellate authority, filed second appeal under Section 10 of Trade Tax Act before the Commercial Tax Tribunal. The revisionist also submitted an application under Section 12B before the Tribunal with the prayer to accept Form 3-D which were received by the revisionist after the order passed by the authorities. The Tribunal rejected the claim of the revisionist on the ground that since the matter relates to assessment year 1998-99 and submitted Form 3D after a period of two years as prescribed under the Act and therefore the benefit of the same cannot be granted to the revisionist. Against the order of the Tribunal, the revisionist has preferred the instant revision. The instant revision has been admitted on the fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urt, in the case of M/s Ashok Industries Vs. Commissioner Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow, 2019 UPTC (Vol. 103) 1014, under similar circumstances up held the order of the Tribunal relying upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of K.B. Hides Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2004 UPTC 292, held that the benefit of Form 3-D cannot be issued beyond the period of two years from the end of the assessment year. The judgment of the Tribunal is in consonance with the pronouncements of this Court and no infirmity inthe same could be pointed out. No other point was urged by learned counsel for the revisionist. There is no error in the impugned judgment and order of the Tribunal. The revision is accordingly dismissed. The question of law .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X