COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX Vs. DECENT METAL INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri K.M. Sahai, learned Counsel for the applicant.

(2.) DESPITE notice to engage another counsel no one has put in appearance for dealer -opposite party. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1994 -95. The Commissioner of Trade Tax has questioned the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench II, Aligarh, dated August 8,1994 by means of this revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (in short, referred to as, "the Act") and has sought to raise the following question of law:

(3.) THE dealer is involved in supply of goods to various parties including Government Departments. It was initially assessed by order dated December 1,1998. However, certain transactions relating to supply of goods being L. T. open clamps A -type were noticed to have not been disclosed in the returns filed by the dealer and therefore, proceedings for reassessment under Section 21 of the Act were initiated. In the assessment order under Section 21 of the Act, the assessing officer vide order dated September 22, 1989 found that the transactions to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000 of sale of L.T. open clamps A -type to Government department had escaped assessment. Accordingly, treating the said goods to be of unclassified category, he applied rate of tax at eight per cent and determined the tax liability of Rs. 12,000. The dealer preferred an appeal which was dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) by order dated May 3,1990. However, in second appeal the Tribunal though held that the proceedings under Section 21 of the Act were valid but allowed the second appeal of the dealer only to the extent that the rate of tax applicable on sale of such goods would be four per cent and not eight per cent and accordingly reduced the tax liability by Rs. 6,000. Aggrieved by the same the present revision has been filed.