Court No. - 59
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 211 of 2009 Revisionist :- M/S Kisan Machinary Works Opposite Party :- The Commissioner Commerical Tax U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Revisionist :- N.R. Kumar,Vishwjeet Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today. Taken on record.
2. Heard Shri Vishwjeet, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue.
3. Present revision has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur dated 19.01.2009 passed in Second Appeal No. 67 of 2007 for A.Y. 2006-07 (penalty), whereby the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty imposed against the assessee under Section 13-A(4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
4. The present revision has been pressed on the following question of law:
"Whether, after acceptance of the assessee's books of accounts (by the Tribunal), any penalty under Section 13-A(4) of the Act could survive?"
5. In short, learned counsel for the assessee submits that during the assessment year in question, the assessee was engaged in fabrication and sale of sugar mill machinery parts. It was subjected to assessment proceedings and penalty under Section 13-A(4) with respect to bill no.4 dated 12.09.2006 for an amount of Rs. 2,96,400/-. These goods were detained in transit and penalty had been imposed, treating the same to be not properly accounted for in the regular books of accounts of the assessee. The same also gave rise to the rejection of books of accounts and best judgement assessment being made in the regular assessment proceedings.
6. By means of the supplementary affidavit filed today, learned counsel for the assessee has brought on record a copy of the order dated 20.08.2015 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur for A.Y. 2006-07 (U.P.) in the case of the assessee itself. Perusal of that order reveals that in that order, the Tribunal considered the seizure of goods and imposition of penalty arising from aforesaid bill no. 4 dated 12.09.2006 and thereafter accepted the explanation furnished by the assessee. The books of accounts of the assessee were consequently accepted and assessment completed at returned figures.
7. Learned counsel for the assessee states, to the best of his knowledge, that the aforesaid order of the Tribunal has attained finality, inasmuch as the assessee has not received any notice of any revision being filed by the revenue against that order. However, it is left open to the revenue to seek recall of this order in case any revision filed from the assessment proceedings has been allowed.
8. Once the books of accounts of the assessee have been accepted by the Tribunal, there survives no charge of the goods being not accounted for. Accordingly, the penalty issue cannot survive. The question of law is answered in the negative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
9. The revision allowed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 AHA