M/S. NARBADA INDUSTRIES Vs. C.C.T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assessee is the revisionist, herein, who is aggrieved by the order of the First Appellate Authority and the Tribunal, disallowing relief to it of Form-III C (2), issued under the U.P. Trade Tax Act,1948 on the ground that such form is invalid by virtue of Rule 12-B(4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948.

(2.) The assessee is engaged in the activity of purchasing mentha and selling mentha oil. Certain purchases of mentha were made by it between the period 26.12.2006 to 31.3.2007, including two transactions of purchase of mentha valued at Rs. 1.97 crores from dealers stationed at Sambhal. These dealers had moved an appropriate application under the provisions of the Act for being registered as a dealer on 23.12.2006. The order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 15.6.2010 is on record, according to which, after a prolong dispute selling dealer registered and was held entitled to issue Form-III C (2) for the period 23.12.2006 to 31.12.2007. Form-III C (2) was accordingly issued by the selling dealer to the revisionist in 2010. It appears that in the absence of Form-III C (2) orders of assessment against the revisionist were passed, holding it liable to payment of Tax as the first purchaser. An appeal was pending, wherein such Form-III C(2) was filed as additional evidence. Benefit of such additional evidence has been denied to the assessee relying upon Rule 12-B (4) of the Rules of 1948, which reads as under:-

(3.) The first appellate authority was of the opinion that since form was issued in the year 2010, it would not be valid for the transactions undertaken more than 3 year earlier. A Second appeal filed before the Tribunal has also been rejected for the same reason. Thus aggrieved, the revisionist has approached this Court by filing the present revision.