Court No. - 59
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 1039 of 2009 Revisionist :- S/S Raj Bhandar Opposite Party :- The Commissioner Commercial Tax Counsel for Revisionist :- Alok Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Present revision has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Varanasi dated 18.05.2009 passed in Second Appeal No. 186 of 2007 for A.Y. 2003-04. By that order, the Tribunal has confirmed the order passed by the first appeal authority who had reduced the disputed tax liability from Rs. 12,840/- to Rs. 10,150/-.
2. Heard Shri Aloke Kumar, learned counsel for the assessee and Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue.
3. The present revision has been pressed on the following question of law:
"Whether there existed any material of the nature as may justify the disputed demand of tax, the assessee being a petty tea seller?"
4. Undisputedly, the assessee had claimed the benefit of exemption on account of low sale value. It appears that, during the assessment year in question, the assessee was engaged in the activity of selling tea and other items. During the assessment year in question, the sale turnover upto Rs.1,50,000/- remained exempt from tax. It appears that for reasons best known to the revenue authorities, a survey was conducted on 10.09.2003, wherein 2 kg of Chhena, 20 pieces of Gulab Jamun, 35 packets of biscuits, 2 packets of snacks, 8 crates of cold drinks and 15 pieces of samosa, were noted.
5. In absence of any other adverse material and acting solely on the facts noted above, the assessing authority proceeded to make a best judgment assessment, that too in proceedings under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and thus estimated the annual turnover of the assessee at Rs. 2,26,000/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal, wherein, instead of setting aside the assessment order, the first appeal authority granted a partial relief of reducing the penalty amount by Rs. 2,690/-.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, it cannot escape the attention of the Court that the assessee is a petty dealer. Accepting the facts noted in the survey report to be absolutely correct, it is self-apparent that the scale of business of the assessee would have been barely minimum to make two ends meet. Though, no conclusion is required to be drawn as to the motive of the revenue authorities in having carried the re- assessment proceedings against the assessee, yet, it appears absolutely clear to the Court that the revenue authorities had only engaged in exercise of wastage of time by going after such a petty dealer on such insignificant facts, resulting in loss of government money and time.
7. The appeal authorities have also failed to offer the correction which they ought to, in such cases so that the powers and jurisdiction of the assessing authorities do not get corrupted and are not misused for collateral purposes and they remain free from whims and fancies. The assessing authority should have acted mindful and commensurate to the power vested in him and should not have stooped so low.
8. The entire exercise of reassessment and the estimation of turnover of such a petty dealer is found to be of no use and based on no valid or justifiable consideration. There was no effort made by the assessing authority to estimate the annual purchase and sale of each item found noted in the survey report and only ad hoc additions were made to somehow reach a figure that may justify the proceedings. Even that figure is found to be too meagre and irrelevant in the context of the power exercised.
9. Accordingly, the question of law is answered in the negative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
10. The revision is allowed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 AHA