ISRAR AHMAD Vs. TEHSILDAR SADAR MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajiv Gupta learned counsel for writ petitioner and Sri S.P. Kesarwani learned Standing Counsel for State Respondents no. 1 to 3.

(2.) In this writ petition, the writ petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

(3.) The contention of the writ petitioner is that he was partner only for four months in the year 1992. Thereafter he retired from partnership and the firm was dissolved and a new firm was constituted and notice under Sec. 8BB was given to appropriate authority which was rejected on 17.8.2000. The contention of Mr. Gupta learned counsel for writ petitioner is that there was no scope for rejection of the application under Sec. 8 BB since there is no provision for the same in the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The said rejection order was passed in the year 1993 and no step was taken by the petitioner against the said rejection order. That apart, we are of the view that the scope of Sec. 8-BB is very limited. Sec. 8-BB is set out below: