https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378614 Compounding under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was treated as an alternative assessment mechanism available only if the statutory conditions in the scheme were satisfied. Each assessment year was regarded as a separate unit, so eligibility for compounding for a later year depended on the assessee not being in default in respect of the earlier year's compounding fee with interest. Because the default continued on the date the later year's application was rejected, the subsequent curing of that default did not revive eligibility for that assessment year. The assessee was therefore not entitled to compounding for the later year, and the question of law was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. en-us Sat, 17 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Apr 2019 06:07:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378614 Compounding under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was treated as an alternative assessment mechanism available only if the statutory conditions in the scheme were satisfied. Each assessment year was regarded as a separate unit, so eligibility for compounding for a later year depended on the assessee not being in default in respect of the earlier year's compounding fee with interest. Because the default continued on the date the later year's application was rejected, the subsequent curing of that default did not revive eligibility for that assessment year. The assessee was therefore not entitled to compounding for the later year, and the question of law was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sat, 17 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378614