Skip to content


Faqir Chand Panna Lal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number S.T.R. No. 393 of 1984
Judge
Reported in[1986]62STC209(All)
AppellantFaqir Chand Panna Lal
RespondentCommissioner of Sales Tax
Appellant Advocate M. Ahmad, Adv.
Respondent Advocate The Standing Counsel
DispositionPetition allowed
Excerpt:
- - the tribunal in the second appeal has also endorsed the view taken by the lower appellate authority. however, the appellate authority has power to entertain or admit additional evidence if it is satisfied that the assessee was prevented for sufficient cause or had sufficient reasons to believe that the evidence filed before him could not be filed before the sales tax officer. the orders of the tribunal as well as that of the assistant commissioner (judicial) are quashed......that the assessee was prevented for sufficient cause or had sufficient reasons to believe that the evidence filed before him could not be filed before the sales tax officer. circumstances of the case are such that it cannot be said that the assessee could reasonably dispute the liability of tax and as such it is desirable that the appeal of the assessee should be heard on merit instead of rejecting it on technical ground.3. in the result the revision succeeds and is allowed. the orders of the tribunal as well as that of the assistant commissioner (judicial) are quashed. the assistant commissioner (judicial) is directed to decide the appeal afresh. in case of the assessee files form 3-c along with application under section 12-b and if it satisfies the first appellate authority as to why.....
Judgment:

Anshuman Singh, J.

1. The assessee has preferred this revision against the judgment passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench II, Aligarh, dated 20th June, 1984, relating to assessment year 1977-78 dismissing its appeal.

2. The short question involved in the instant revision is that the appeal of the assessee has been rejected by the first appellate authority on the ground that no admitted tax was deposited by it. The Tribunal in the second appeal has also endorsed the view taken by the lower appellate authority. It appears that the assessee had made certain purchases against form 3-C but since it could not file those forms 3-C it was not granted exemption. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee has contended that since the purchases were made against form 3-C it was entitled to exemption and the appellate authority did not afford an opportunity of filing the same which could not be filed before the Sales Tax Officer. It is true that form 3-C cannot be filed by the assessee as a matter of right before the appellate authorities as it will be filing an additional evidence under Section 12-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. However, the appellate authority has power to entertain or admit additional evidence if it is satisfied that the assessee was prevented for sufficient cause or had sufficient reasons to believe that the evidence filed before him could not be filed before the Sales Tax Officer. Circumstances of the case are such that it cannot be said that the assessee could reasonably dispute the liability of tax and as such it is desirable that the appeal of the assessee should be heard on merit instead of rejecting it on technical ground.

3. In the result the revision succeeds and is allowed. The orders of the Tribunal as well as that of the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) are quashed. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) is directed to decide the appeal afresh. In case of the assessee files form 3-C along with application under Section 12-B and if it satisfies the first appellate authority as to why the said evidence was not adduced before the Sales Tax Officer, the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) will admit the said evidence and decide the case on merit in accordance with law. However, there will be no order as to costs.

4. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) concerned as contemplated under Section 11(8) of the Act.


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