9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, cross-appeals were preferred, but the Tribunal, after detailed discussion and verification of the records, recorded a finding of fact in favour of the respondent, which has not been specifically challenged in the present revisions. Thus, no interference is called for in both the revisions. No question of law arises in the present revisions - both the revisions are dismissed. - Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal, J. For the Revisionist : S.C. For the Opposite Party : Suyash Agrawal ORDER HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Shri B.K. Pandey, learned ACSC for the revisionist and Shri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. Both the revisions have been filed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Form F as prescribed under the Central Sales Tax Act. While framing the assessment order, the Assessing Authority has levied full rate of tax for non-submission of Form C and Form F. Against the assessment order, appeal was preferred. During the pendency of the appeal, Forms F/C were submitted along with an application under section 12-B of the Act as additional evidence, to which a report was called for from the Assessing Authority, which was submitted. The first appellate authority by its order dated 27.12.2008, although recorded the finding of submission of report by the assessing authority, but still remanded the matter for fresh assessment. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, second appeal was preferred by the respondent, which has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the same, has rightly granted the benefit to the respondent. He further submits that so far as the consignment of sale is concerned, not only Form F, but sale patti, requisite details and supporting documents were also filed, which was duly verified by the Tribunal and then, the benefit was granted. He further submits that Form C, which was submitted before the first appellate authority, was verified by the Assessing Authority as it is evident from the first appellate authority order as well as the Tribunal, being last court of fact law. He further submits that neither in appeal any specific ground was taken by the revisionist, nor about the illegality committed in passing the impugned order, nor any material has been brought on record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
