COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX Vs. INDIA TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision is against the order dated July 31, 2000 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 68 of 2000 relating to the assessment year 1991 -92. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The dealer -opposite party carries on the business of raw hide and skin. He admitted no sales or purchase in the documents filed before the assessing authority. The assessing authority accepted the contention of the dealer -opposite party and passed the assessment order summarily. The said order has been revised by the Deputy Commissioner (Executive), Trade Tax, Moradabad in exercise of power conferred on him under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The revising authority has found that on January 15, 1992, the dealer -opposite party was found transporting raw hide outside the State of U. P., on sale. This order has been set aside by the Tribunal by the order under revision. The Tribunal held that either the said information was not there or if it was there, the same was left out of consideration when the original assessment order was passed. In the memo of the revision the following question of law has been framed:

(2.) HEARD the learned Standing Counsel for the Department. None is present on behalf of the dealer -opposite party. Affidavit of service has been filed and it is held that the dealer -opposite party has been sufficiently served.