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 refusal to issue Form IIIB and Form IIIC/1 under the U.P. Trade Tax Rules could be sustained on the ground of alleged non-payment of tax dues, and whether the impugned refusal order was vitiated by irrelevant considerations.
Analysis: The issue of issuance of the forms was governed by Rule 12B and Rule 25B of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948, under which the trade tax ality had to examine whether the dealer's demand for blank forms was genuine and reasonable. The refusal order rested essentially on alleged non-payment of admitted tax and the counter-affidavit also sought to justify the refusal on that basis, with reference to Rule 85(4), though that provision related to a different form and had no real bearing on the forms in question. The Court held that the tax authorities have a separate machinery for determination and recovery of tax dues and cannot use the issue of statutory forms as coercive leverage on unrelated grounds. The impugned order did not record any finding that the demand for forms was not genuine and reasonable.
Conclusion: The refusal to issue the forms could not be sustained because it was founded on irrelevant considerations, and the impugned order was liable to be set aside with reconsideration directed afresh.