1984 (10) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Allahabad High Court delivered by B. N. SAPRU, J., on November 23, 1983 is printed below:   SAPRU, J.-This is a revision by the assessee.   The assessee had filed a return. The assessee's account books were rejected and disclosed turnover enhanced. The assessee went up in appeal to the Assistant Commissioner (judicial) who upheld the rejection of the account books but reduced the turnover determined. The assessee went up in further appeal before the Tribunal. The Commissioner also filed an appeal who was aggrieved with that part of the order which reduced the quantum of the turnover. Unfortunately both the appeals were not connected. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee upholding the rejection of the account .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessee and the Commissioner, they are heard and decided together.   ORDER Special leave granted. The respondent was assessed to sales tax under the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act for the year 1977-78. The books of account were rejected and the disclosed taxable turnover of Rs. 51,451 was enhanced on estimate to Rs. 1,00,000 by the assessment order dated October 30, 1979. Assessee's appeal to the Assistant Commissioner succeeded in part and by order dated June 10, 1980, the Assistant Commissioner reduced the taxable turnover to Rs. 65,000 while sustaining rejection of the books of account. Against the appellate decision of the Assistant Commissioner, the assessee and the Commissioner appealed to the Tribunal-the assessee claiming a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Court, the present appeal has been filed by the Commissioner. We entirely agree with the High Court that the two appeals should have been heard at the same time by the Tribunal. Since both the parties were before the Tribunal, it was proper that when the assessee's appeal was taken up first, the Tribunal's attention should have been drawn to the fact that the Commissioner's appeal against the same decision of the Assistant Commissioner was pending and both should have been clubbed together. If that had been done, the unfortunate situation which has necessitated the present appeal to be carried to this court would not have arisen. On the facts of the case, we do not accept the view of the High Court that the doctrine of merger applied. Bo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X