Heard learned counsel for the assessee, Sri Piyush Agarwal, and Sri B.K.Pandey, the learned standing counsel for the State.
This revision has been filed by the assessee under Section 11 of the U.P.Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 1996-97 against the order of the Tribunal dated 28.10.2002. The questions of law referred to are hereunder:
"(i) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal as well as the lower authorities are justified in imposing the tax @ 5% instead of 2% which was prevailing at the relevant time ?
(ii) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was justified in not allowing the appeal of the applicant in toto in spite of finding of fact recorded in favour of the applicant ?
(iii) Whether in the absence of any adverse material on record, the Trade Tax Tribunal and the lower authorities were not justified in not giving the benefit of tax on the sale of hosiery cloth to the tune of Rs.1,08,41,474/ made by the applicant.
(iv) Whether in any view of the matter, the order passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal is justified ?" The assessee is seeking the benefit of a notification issued on 25.5.1994, No.1625. However, upon perusal of the entire record it does not appear that the assessee has taken any point before the 1st Appellate Authority or before the IInd Appellate Authority with regard to imposition of tax @ 2% on hosiery of all kinds. It is for the first time in this revision that this issue is being agitated, therefore, it can not be said that the Tribunal has committed any mistake in passing the impugned order dated 28.10.2002.
This revision has no merit and is dismissed. Order Date :- 27.1.2010 AKJ