1985 (11) TMI 221 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

High Court allows revision by public company challenging sales tax imposition under U.P. Sales Tax Act

The High Court of Allahabad allowed the revision filed by the assessee, a public limited company, challenging the imposition of sales tax under the U.P. ... - Issues:1. Interpretation of section 4-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act regarding sales tax imposition on the assessee.2. Determination of whether rims sold by the assessee were declared commodities under section 14(iv)(viii) of the Central Sales Tax Act.Detailed Analysis:The High Court of Allahabad heard a revision filed by the assessee against the U.P. Sales Tax Tribunal's order related to the assessment year 1974-75. The assessee, a public limited company, challenged the imposition of sales tax by the authorities. The first contention raised was regarding sales made against form 3 Kha to customers with recognition certificates under section 4-B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessee argued that since sales were made against form 3 Kha, sales tax was not realized from customers, questioning the imposition of tax. Another issue raised was whether the rims sold were declared commodities under the Central Sales Tax Act. The Tribunal's decision was based on a notification dated 11th June, 1974, which the assessee contested, citing a notification dated 10th October, 1968, not being superseded. The High Court analyzed the notifications and concluded that if the 1968 notification was in force during the assessment, the benefit of section 4-B should apply. The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the case considering the 1968 notification, potentially entitling the applicant to the benefit due to non-realization of sales tax from customers with recognition certificates.In conclusion, the revision was allowed, setting aside the Tribunal's order, and directing a fresh consideration in light of the observations. The Court emphasized the importance of the 1968 notification and the need for the Tribunal to review the case accordingly. No costs were awarded, and a copy of the order was to be sent to the concerned Tribunal as per the U.P. Sales Tax Act.