Composition scheme liability under U.P. Trade Tax law bars refund where production starts later than expected.

A dealer who voluntarily opted for the composition scheme under Section 7-D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was not entitled to refund or proportionate reduction of composition money merely because production began later in the year. The scheme treated tax liability as a lump-sum obligation for the agreed period and governed it strictly by the accepted terms and agreement. Where the scheme expressly excluded reduction for late commencement of production or non-production for part of the year, liability was not tied to actual turnover. Accordingly, the refund claim was held not maintainable and the refusal of refund was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether a dealer who voluntarily opted for the compounding scheme under Section 7-D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 could claim refund or proportionate reduction of composition money for the period prior to commencement of production.

Analysis: The composition scheme under Section 7-D permitted acceptance of tax liability in lump sum for the agreed period and was to be governed by the terms of the scheme and the agreement accepted by the dealer. The scheme specifically provided that late commencement of production or non-production for part of the year would not entitle the dealer to any reduction or change in the composition amount, and the liability was not linked to actual turnover. Since the petitioner had voluntarily opted for the scheme and the authority had acted in accordance with its terms, no refund was admissible merely because production commenced later in the year.

Conclusion: The claim for refund was not maintainable and the impugned orders refusing refund were upheld, against the assessee.

---