Heard learned Counsel for the assessee and 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 1987-88 against the order of the Tribunal dated 1.9.1997 by which the Tribunal has imposed a penalty under Section 10B of the U.P.Trade Tax Act. The questions of law referred to are hereunder:-
(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Trade Tax Tribunal was correct to hold that insulation warnish does not fall under the category electric goods but falls under the paint and warnish ignoring the fact that in the regular assessment proceedings insulation warnish was disclosed as electrical goods and the same was accepted by the assessing authority and this finding of the first appellate authority was not challenged by the department before the Trade Tax Tribunal.
(ii) Whether the learned Tribunal was correct to restore the penalty without specifically setting aside the findings of the first appellate authority that there was no false representation or misuse of form C in purchase of insulation warnish ?
(iii) Whether in any view of the matter the Tribunal was correct not to consider that the modus opprandi of the applicant was that the insulation warnish is used in manufacture of winding electrical goods and the same was sold to the Motor Electrical Dealers ?
Having heard learned counsel for the assessee and learned Standing Counsel and after perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is correct especially in view of the fact that the assessee has not been able to establish that the use of insulation warnish is confined to electric goods.
In view of the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal, no question of law arises.
This revision has no merit and is dismissed. Order Date :- 4.2.2010 S.P.