2020 (10) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t permissible under Section 67 of the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act? HELD THAT:- Even though an important question of law may arise for consideration, we do not think it appropriate to entertain this petition only because a paltry sum of ₹ 54,445/- is involved - Even though every single rupee is important for the State and for the assessee, but keeping in view the quantum involved and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he benefit of ₹ 9,15,997/-was only allowed by the assessing authority, and the claim for ₹ 54,445/- was rejected on the ground that it was not allowable because out of the total sales of finished goods in the months of January, February and March, 2007, the assesse had disbursed the stock of finished goods as stock transfer sales to an extent of 47.25%, 75.80% and 17.6%. Therefore, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion in this revision, namely, 'Whether, additional evidence could be adduced by the assessee at the appellate stage which is not permissible under Section 67 of the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act?' 3. On hearing learned counsel for the revenue, even though an important question of law may arise for consideration, we do not think it appropriate to entertain this petition only because a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X