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 demand of additional security under section 8C of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was justified on the facts found, and whether the consequential cancellation of registration could survive.
Analysis: Section 8C empowers the assessing authority to demand additional security where it appears necessary for proper realization of tax, penalty or other dues, and the amount must remain within the limit of the estimated tax payable on the dealer's turnover. The admitted facts showed that the dealer's business was of recent origin, no property was disclosed, the turnover at one place was nominal while the turnover at the branch was substantial, and the impugned order recorded reasons linking these circumstances to the need to safeguard revenue. The demand was therefore not arbitrary or without nexus merely because admitted tax had been paid for one month. At the same time, the amount demanded was considered excessive in the circumstances, warranting judicial reduction.
Conclusion: The demand of additional security was upheld in principle but reduced from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 3 lakhs, with consequential cancellation of registration to stand cancelled if the reduced security was furnished within time.
Ratio Decidendi: Additional security under section 8C may be demanded on recorded reasons when necessary to protect revenue and ensure realization of tax dues, but the quantum must be proportionate to the estimated tax liability and the surrounding facts.