KAMAL CORPORATION Vs. COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of Tribunal dated May 29, 2006 relating to the assessment year 2000 -01 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

(2.) THE applicant claimed to be a purchasing agent, made purchases of wheat for and on behalf of ex -U.P. principal for Rs. 45,67,160. The applicant claimed to have maintained the books of account in the form of cash book, ledger, purchase order register, 6 -R, 9 -R, satti bahi, bill book, etc. Before the assessing authority applicant had furnished the list of purchases made from the farmers with reference to 6 -R, date of purchases and also furnished the details of the ex -U.P. Principal with reference to 9 -R giving the details of expenses, value of goods, truck number by which the goods were transported. On the examination of the books of account and necessary details, the assessing authority issued the show -cause notice, which is annexure -1 to the revision, on the ground that there is difference in the date of purchase made for and on behalf of ex -U.P. principal and its dispatch, name and address of the farmers are not mentioned and thus, the purchases were not verifiable. Sometime payment was made to the farmers at the time of purchase and sometime of receipt of the goods. The details were sought. The purchase order for the purchase of bardana had not been produced and the purchase list of bardana was also sought. Returns were not filed. The applicant filed reply to the objections raised by the assessing authority. Assessing authority passed the assessment orders on November 3, 2004 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. Assessing authority had rejected the claim of the purchases made for and on behalf of ex -U.P. Principal on the ground referred in the show -cause notice and levied the tax on the purchases of wheat under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and also treated the transfer of the goods outside the State of U.P. as inter -State sales and levied the tax under the Central Sales Tax Act. Being aggrieved, the applicant filed two separate appeals before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Trade Tax, Allahabad, who vide order dated April 6, 2005 rejected both the appeals. The applicant filed two second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order set aside the order passed by the first appellate authority and the assessing authority and remanded back the matter to the assessing authority to pass the assessment orders afresh.

(3.) WITH the consent of both the parties, present revision is being disposed of at this stage.