Court No. - 33 Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 480 of 2002 Petitioner :- The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P Lucknow Respondent :- Standard Chappal (Regd.) Naya Chowk, Kanpur Petitioner Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.
This revision under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax
Act has been filed by the revisionist State for the
assessment year 1978-79 against the order of trade
tax tribunal dated 26.3.2002. The questions of law
referred to are as under:
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Trade Tax Tribunal was justified to quash the penalty order passed
u/s. 4B (6) in view of full bench judgment of Hon’ble High Court in
the matter of M/s. Diwan Rexins (P) Ltd. Meerut vs. State of U.P. &
others (1996 U.P.T.C. 551)?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to quash the penalty order
passed u/s.4B (6) in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the matter of M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. & others vs. State of Haryana
& another, 1990 U.P.T.C. 198 already over rule by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court itself in the case of Hotel Balaji vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh A.I.R. 1993 SC 1048?
(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to quash the penalty order
passed u/s. 4B (6)( inspite of the fact that the goods manufactured by
using raw material purchase against Form 3B were transferred to its
branches outside the State of U.P. by way of stock transfer?”
The Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that
the stock transfer would not amount to disposal in
order to attract the penalty under section 4B (6) of
the U.P. Trade Tax Act as the ownership does not
establish in stock transfer.
In view of the above, I see no reason to interfere with
the order of the tribunal. No question of law arises.
The revision is dismissed as above. No costs.
Order Date :- 28.1.2010
rk
