Revision against a best judgment assessment ordered due to penalty rejection. The High Court allowed the revision, holding that since the penalty was unjustified, the rejection of books and subsequent assessment could not stand.
The revision is allowed and the question of law is answered in favour of the assessee.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 7
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 361 of 2017
Applicant :- S/S Colgate Palmolive India Ltd. Opposite Party :- The Commissioner Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
The present revision has been filed against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Kanpur dated 03.05.2017 passed in Second Appeal No. 393 of 2011 for the Assessment Year 200708 (U.P.).
The revision has been pressed on the following question of law:
" A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal as well as authorities below were legally justified in rejecting the account books of the dealer as well as making the best judgment assessment against the applicant?"
Admittedly, the best judgment assessment arose against the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (U.P.) owing to penalty being imposed against the assessee under Section 15A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The revision arising from the penalty being Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 362 of 2017 (S/S Colgate Palmolive India Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax Tribunal, U.P.) has been allowed by judgment and order dated 19.12.2018. The penalty proceedings have been held to be unjustified in view of the findings and facts of the case wherein it had been found that the transaction in question was one of stock transfer which had been disclosed.
In view of the fact that books of accounts had been rejected on best judgment assessment had arisen solely on account of penalty imposed under Section 15A(1)(o), the present revision must also succeed.
The revision succeeds and is allowed. The question of law noted above is answered in the negative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
Order Date :- 20.12.2018 AHA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Commercial Tax Tribunal and authorities below were legally justified in rejecting the applicant's account books and making a best judgment assessment?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S/S Colgate Palmolive India Ltd.
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
