Mandatory filing limit for concessional tax forms bars late Form III-B acceptance despite CBI custody of records.

Form III-B furnished after the two-year period under amended Rule 25-B(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules could not be accepted merely because the assessee's books and records were in CBI custody. The Court treated the statutory time limit for filing concessional forms as mandatory and held that it could not be extended on equitable grounds unless the rule itself allowed it. The claim for concessional tax was therefore rejected, and the orders refusing the benefit were sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether Form III-B, furnished beyond the period prescribed under Rule 25-B(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, could be accepted on the ground that the assessee's books and records had remained in CBI custody.

Analysis: The assessment years in question were governed by the amended Rule 25-B(3), which limited the benefit of concessional tax to forms filed within two years of the transaction. The forms were admittedly filed beyond that period. The Court held that the prescribed period could not be extended merely because the records had been seized by the CBI. Relying on the binding Division Bench view, it was concluded that the statutory limitation under the rule was mandatory and the benefit of Form III-B could not be granted after expiry of the stipulated period.

Conclusion: The issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The claim for acceptance of Form III-B beyond two years was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The revisions were held to be without merit, and the orders of the authorities below refusing the concessional benefit were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal rule prescribes a fixed time limit for furnishing concessional forms, that limit is mandatory and cannot be enlarged on equitable grounds unless the rule itself so permits.

---