Dismissed

Commissioner Trade Tax v. M/S Sai Pipe Industries Moona Pandey Moradabad

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2019STRE/2281/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by M/S Sai Pipe Industries challenging the Trade Tax Tribunal's order. The Court deemed the Tribunal's factual findings non-perverse and not contrary to the record. Consequently, all formulated questions of law were answered against the appellant, and the revision was dismissed. No specific statutory provisions or prior case law were engaged in

What the court decided

AI extract

Commissioner Trade Tax Vs M/S Sai… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 2281 of 2007

¶3

Applicant :- M/S Sai Pipe Industries Moona Pandey Moradabad Opposite Party :- Commissioner Trade Tax Counsel for Applicant :- R.R.Agrawal,Suyash Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashok Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned standing counsel for the Commissioner.

¶6

The question of law, which has been formulated in memo of revision, reads as under:

¶7

" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct to draw adverse inference pertaining to page 19 to 29 of Exhibit 3 for determining the net turnover of the applicant specially when the diary relate to Jasveer Singh?

¶8

II. Whether the Tribunal having accepted the books of account under Central Sales Tax Act, the books of account under the U.P. trade Tax are rightly rejected?

¶9

III. Whether the Tribunal rightly determined the suppressed sale of Rs.5 lacs. without any material on record?

¶10

IV. Whether the Tribunal rightly determined the purchases of raw material from unregistered dealers under Section 3AAAA of the Act without any material on record, specially when the sales were made against Form 3D to the Government Department?

¶11

V. Whether the Tribunal being the Court of last fact finding authority rightly not considered the reply to the show cause notice filed before the assessing authority? "

¶12

The revision has arisen from Tribunal's order dated 23.6.2007 relating to Assessment Year 2002-03.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel, after some arguments, could not dispute that findings recorded by Tribunal is a finding of fact and nothing could be shown to demonstrate that the said finding is perverse or contrary to record or is otherwise not in accordance with law.

¶14

In view thereof, aforesaid question is answered against the assessee.

¶15

The revision is dismissed.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.4.2019/S.S.

Commissioner Trade Tax v. M/S Sai Pipe Industries Moona Pandey Moradabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Commissioner Trade Tax v. M/S Sai Pipe Industries Moona Pandey Moradabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ved Ram Veer Singh Vs the Commissioner of Trade Tax

M/S Friends Automobiles Sumersager Vs the Commissioner Trade Tax U.P.

M/S Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Sansthan Thru Secy. Vs the Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow

M/S Shakti Enterprisees Railway Road Meerut Vs M/S Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow

M/S Ashwani Metals Jwalapuri Vs the Commissioner Trade Tax

Mohan Ent Udyog Vs the Commissioner Trade Tax