Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal for failure to deposit the admitted tax under the proviso to section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, and whether the assessee could shift its stand in appeal from the admission made before the assessing authority.
Analysis: The assessee had admitted liability on a specific turnover before the assessing authority after the books of account and surrounding circumstances showed that it had effected sales as a dealer. The Court held that this was not a mere admission on a question of law, but an admission rooted in the facts found by the assessing authority. In the light of the proviso to section 9, the relevant admission was the one made before the assessing authority, and not a later attempt in appeal to resile from it. The proposed additional grounds were viewed as an attempt to avoid the consequence of non-payment of tax on the admitted liability and were not bona fide.
Conclusion: The appeal was incompetent for want of deposit of the admitted tax, and the appellate and revisional orders dismissing the challenge were in law.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in favour of the department, and the assessee's challenge to the dismissal of its appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of the appeal-maintainability condition in the proviso to section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, the relevant admission is the admission made before the assessing authority on the basis of the factual matrix, and an assessee cannot evade that condition by taking a contrary stand for the first time in appeal.