9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts arise in both the revisions and as such both are being decided by means of this common judgment. 4. The facts in brief are that the revisionist is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and is registered under the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act and is said to be maintaining all the books of accounts as prescribed under law. By means of an order dated 31.03.1998, the Assessing Authority while passing the assessment order imposed higher rate of tax on the sales incurred by the revisionist. Challenging the said order dated 31.03.1998, a first appeal was preferred by the revisionist. The said appeal was partly allowed vide order dated 09.03.1999. Still aggrieved against the said order, both the State as well as the revisionist preferred second appeal under Section 10 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act before the Trade Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal vide its order dated 04.04.2008 allowed the appeal filed by the State/Revenue and dismissed the appeal filed by the revisionist. The aforesaid revisions have been filed challenging the said orders of the Tribunal dated 04.04.2008. 5. Although both the revisions were admitted vide order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by notification, omit the entry relating to any goods from the Schedule and may, in the like manner, restore any entry so omitted, and upon the issue any such notification omitting or restoring any entry the said Schedule shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be deemed to be, amended accordingly. (e) on the turnover in respect of goods, other than those referred to in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d), at the the point of sale by the manufacturer or importer at the rate of eight percent: Provided that the State Government may, from time to time, by notification, modify the rate or point of tax on the turnover in respect of any such goods, with effect from such date as may be notified in that behalf so however, that the rate does not exceed eight per cent. (2) Every notification made under this section shall, as soon as may be after it is made, be laid before each House of the State Legislature, while it is in session, for a total period of not less than fourteen days, extending in its one session or more than one successive sessions, and shall, unless some later date is appointed take effect from the date of its publication in Gazette subject to such modifications ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... direct that the additional tax shall be payable with effect from such date, in such manner and at such rate (not exceeding twenty five per cent.) on the tax payable under the other provisions of this Act as may be specified in the notification - (a) by every dealer irrespective of the aggregate of his turnover, or (b) by every dealer the aggregate of whose turnover as referred to in sub-section (2) of section 3 exceeds such amount as may be specified in the notification; and different rates may be specified in relation to different amounts of such turnover: Provided that in calculating such additional tax payable by the dealer, there shall not be taken into consideration the tax payable in respect of- (i) the sales or purchases of 'declared goods', (ii) the sales or purchases of other goods relating to any period prior to the date with effect from which such additional tax shall be payable." 8. In the light of the said statutory provisions, Sri Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate argues that the maximum rate of tax, as can be levied, is prescribed under Section 3-E read with Section 3-A, wherein the rates of tax has been prescribed. He reiterates that the rate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upra), this Court quoted with approval the following observations made in Cape Brandy Syndicate v. I.R.C. (1921) 2 K.B.403: "I think it is clearly established in Attorney General v. Clarkson (1900) 1 QB 156 that subsequent legislation may be looked at in order to see the proper construction to be put upon an earlier Act where that earlier Act is ambiguous. I quit agree that subsequent legislation if it proceeded on an erroneous construction of previous legislation cannot alter that previous legislation; but if there be any ambiguity in the earlier legislation, then the subsequent legislation may fix the proper interpretation which is to be put upon the earlier Act."" 10. No other argument has been advanced by Sri Dhruv Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the revisionist. 11. Sri Sanjay Sareen, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, justifies the levy of tax and argues that in terms of the mandate of Trade Tax Act, the liability to pay the tax arises out of Section 3 and the rate of tax is prescribed under Section 3-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. He argues that in addition to the tax as prescribed to be levied, the State Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
