TIRUGI NARAYAN PANDEY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The assessee-applicant has filed the present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (now U.P. Trade Tax Act) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against the order dated June 26, 2000 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench 3, Varanasi in Second Appeal No. 96 of 1989 (1984-85).

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present revision are that the assessee is the registered dealer and is engaged in the business of sales of coal. During the assessment year 1984-85, it was allotted 12,859 metric tons of coal by the collieries. Before the Sales Tax Officer, the applicant submitted that during the year in question, it had not imported any coal within the State of U.P. However, the assessing authority disbelieved the version of the applicant and assessed the turnover by the best judgment assessment at Rs. 90,56,300 and imposed a sum of Rs. 3,62,252 as tax. The appeal filed by the applicant before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) was partly allowed vide order dated January 6, 1989. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) reduced the turnover of coal at Rs. 12,25,500. Feeling aggrieved by the said order the applicant as well as the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow, filed second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated June 26, 1990 had partly allowed the appeal of the applicant and had reduced the turnover of coal to Rs. 11,40,000 whereas it had dismissed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The order dated June 26, 1990 in so far as it had fixed the turnover to Rs. 11,40,000 is only under challenge in the present revision.

(3.) I have heard Shri Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.