This is a tax revision against a Tribunal order allowing a dealer's appeal. The petitioner challenged an assessment levy on input goods brought for plant repair. The court dismissed the revision, finding no question of law arises.
The revision petition was dismissed as there was no question of law arising.
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. - 41
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 40 of 2020
Revisionist :- The Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow
Opposite Party :- M/S Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. Counsel for Revisionist :- Bipin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Tarun Agrawal
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
This revision relates to the assessment year 2013-14. The assessment was made under Section 9(4) of the Entry Tax Act. An order imposing a tax of Rs. 1,70,000/- was passed on 30.6.2015. The Appeal filed by the dealer which when was rejected on 30.1.2016, a second appeal was filed before the Commercial Tax Tribunal. On 30.10.2019, when the Second Appellate Court allowed the Appeal filed by the dealer the instant Revision was filed.
Learned counsel for the Appellant assailed the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal and stated that it had wrongly held that iron, steel and cement which was brought in by the dealer from another local area for the repairing of the plant was not liable for taxation under Section 4(1) of the U.P. Tax and Entry of Goods Act.
Learned Senior Advocate Sri Rakesh Ranjan assisted by Sri Tarun Agrawal, Advocate, however, submitted that under Section 4(1) a levy of tax could be made under the Entry Tax Act if goods were brought for the development of the trade, commerce and industry. In the instant case, no goods were brought in for the development of trade, commerce and industry and, therefore, he submitted that the Second Appellate Court correctly allowed the Appeal.
I have perused the judgement and order dated 30.10.2019 passed by the Tribunal and find that the Appellate Court correctly came to the conclusion that the goods which were being sought to be taxed were not brought in for the purpose of the development of trade, commerce and industry and, therefore, the Court finds that there is no error in the judgement and order of the Commercial Tax Tribunals dated 30.10.2019. No question of law, therefore, arises in the instant Revision. It is, accordingly, dismissed .
Order Date :- 4.3.2020 PK
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow
M/S Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd.
Siddhartha Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
