Court No. - 33 Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 86 of 2003 Petitioner :- M/S S. Kumar Steels Respondent :- Commissioner Of Trade Tax Petitioner Counsel :- Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal Respondent Counsel :- S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.
Heard learned counsel for the assessee and the learned
standing counsel for the department.
This revision has been filed by the assessee for the
assessment year 1985-86 (Central) against the judgment
and order of the tribunal dated 22.1.2003. The questions of
law referred to are as under:
“(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Trade Tax
Tribunal was correct to confirm the fixation of net turnover at Rs.3,00,000/-
as against NIL disclosed by the applicant and the gross turnover at
Rs.10,58,100/-, which was exempted being locally purchased?
(ii) Whether the learned Tribunal was correct to estimate the net turnover
ignoring the fact that the applicant was neither importer nor manufacturer nor
had used Form 31 or Form C for import of goods from outside U.P. (see
Punjab Tyres vs. C.S.T. 1982 U.P.T.C. 408 and Enterprising Traders vs.
C.S.T. 1987 U.P.T.C. 247)?
(iii) Whether deposit of money in bank by bank slips could be a ground for
estimating the net turnover at Rs.3,00,000/- when sale or purchase of
commodities are not mentioned?
(iv) Whether survey dated 23.1.1986 could be made a basis for fixing
turnover at Rs.3,00,000/-?”
Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and
having perused the order of the tribunal, it appears that the
assessee was not able to establish that the parchi found at
his premises did not relate to him or that they did not relate
to the Central Sales Tax as the Central Sales Tax was
mentioned in the parchi. Mere denial of the fact that the
parchi do not belong to the assessee are not good enough.
The assessee was confronted with the adverse material with
regard to the Central Sales Tax but was not able to establish
that this material did not relate to him.
In view of the above, I am not incline to interfere with the
order of the tribunal which is just and proper.
The revision is dismissed. No costs.
Order Date :- 2.2.2010
rk