Skip to content


Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Central Pottery - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number S.T.R. No. 499 of 1984
Judge
Reported in[1986]61STC57(All)
AppellantCommissioner, Sales Tax
RespondentCentral Pottery
Appellant Advocate M.C. Singh, Adv.
Respondent Advocate The Standing Counsel
DispositionPetition dismissed
Excerpt:
- - best judgment assessment was passed on the inter-state sale by the sales tax officer. the contention raised by the standing counsel does not hold good......book version was not accepted for the said year. best judgment assessment was passed on the inter-state sale by the sales tax officer. the assessee feeling dissatisfied preferred first appeal. the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the book version was accepted. the commissioner of sales tax feeling aggrieved preferred an appeal before the sales tax tribunal and the tribunal dismissed the appeal. it is against this order that the revenue has come to this court in the instant revision.3. the learned standing counsel appearing for the department has contended that the tribunal has committed an error in accepting the books of account under the central sales tax act, inasmuch as the books of account of the assessee pertaining to uttar pradesh for the same year were rejected. the.....
Judgment:

Anshuman Singh, J.

1. The Commissioner of Sales Tax has filed this revision against the judgment dated 5th September, 1984, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, dismissing the appeal of the revenue pertaining to assessment year 1979-80.

2. The respondent-assessee carried on business in manufacture and sale of crockery. Book version was not accepted for the said year. Best judgment assessment was passed on the inter-State sale by the Sales Tax Officer. The assessee feeling dissatisfied preferred first appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the book version was accepted. The Commissioner of Sales Tax feeling aggrieved preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. It is against this order that the revenue has come to this Court in the instant revision.

3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the department has contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in accepting the books of account under the Central Sales Tax Act, inasmuch as the books of account of the assessee pertaining to Uttar Pradesh for the same year were rejected. The contention raised by the standing counsel does not hold good. The Tribunal has recorded a positive finding that neither the Sales Tax Officer nor the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) has adduced any evidence to show that any suppression was made by the assessee in the inter-State sale. Until and unless a suppression is found in the inter-State sale, the mere fact that the books of account of the assessee have been rejected under the U.P. Sales Tax Act is no ground for rejecting the books of account under the Central Sales Tax Act also.

4. The revision is wholly devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected. However, the parties shall bear their own costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //