Court No. - 59
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 221 of 2009 Revisionist :- M/S Kisan Industries Opposite Party :- Commissioner Of Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Revisionist :- Nasiruzzaman Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. The present revision has been filed by the applicant-
assessee against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, dated 24.12.2008, passed in second appeal no.
62 of 2005, for A.Y. 2000-01 (U.P.). By that order, the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee but allowed the aforesaid appeal filed by the revenue and enhanced the tax liability by Rs. 12,000/-.
2. Heard Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the applicant-assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue.
3. The present revision has been pressed on the following question of law:
"Whether without giving any reason to reverse the finding of the first appeal authority and without giving any cogent reason, the Tribunal could have made an enhancement to the turnover when, undisputedly, the assessee was a petty dealer and it's past record was absolutely clean?"
4. Undisputedly, the assessee was petty manufacturer of hardware. During the assessment year in question, four bills came to the possession of the Enforcement Branch of the revenue. All bills were of the date 20.7.2002. The total value of the four transactions found recorded in those bills was about Rs. 45,000/- only.
5. On the basis of that information, the proceedings for reassessment were instituted against the assessee, for the assessment year in question. Against the disclosed turnover of Rs. 77,949/-, the assessing authority assessed the applicant-assessee to further undisclosed turnover of Rs. 8,50,000/-.
6. In the first appeal, the plea raised by the assessee disowning its connection that four disputed transactions were disbelieved. However, keeping in mind the total value of the disputed bills to be about Rs. 45,000/-, and considering the fact that the past record of the assessee was clean and also keeping in mind that the assessee was a petty dealer, proportionate reduction in the estimated undisclosed turnover was granted by the first appeal authority. It reduced the undisclosed turnover (estimated at Rs. 8,50,000/- by the assessing authority) to Rs. 4,00,000/-.
7. Being aggrieved, the assessee as well as the revenue went in appeal, to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee but partly allowed the appeal filed by the revenue.
8. Upon thus allowing the revenue's appeal, other than expressing its own opinion estimating the undisclosed turnover at Rs. 5,50,000/-, neither the Tribunal has found error in estimation made by the first appeal authority nor given any reason why the estimation made was required to be enhanced. Normally the proceedings may have been remitted to the Tribunal to pass a fresh order, however, in view of the fact that the aforesaid appeal is pertaining to A.Y. 2000-01 and the fact that the Trade Tax Act was repealed in 2008 by the VAT Act that has itself been repealed and has been replaced by the G.S.T. Act, no useful purpose would be served in remanding the matter, specially in light of the observations made above.
9. Consequently, the question of law (as framed above), answered in the negative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
10. The revision is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Prakhar