2013 (12) TMI 1026

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ORDER Heard Sri Kunwar Saksena, learned counsel for the assessee/revisionist. Sri U.K.Pandey has appeared for the respondent/department. The assessee/revisionist is dealing in sale and purchase of paper. The proceedings of assessment for the assessment year 2004-05 were finalized vide order dated 16.5.2006 and the tax liability at the rate of 4% was created against the assessee/revision....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 21(2) of the Act instead of 21(1) of the Act is illegal. Accordingly after setting aside the same remanded the matter to the assessing authority for passing afresh order. The assessee/revisionist was not satisfied by the order of remand and preferred an appeal to the tribunal which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 22.5.2013. It may be worth noting that on an applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is not justified in upholding the order of remand of the first appellate authority. Sri Kunwar Saksena, learned counsel for the assessee/revisionist has placed reliance upon a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Indo National Limited, Ghaziabad Vs. State of U.P. and another 1995 UPTC 924 to contend that issuance of notice itself is bad and suffers from jurisdictional erro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the order of remand was actually served upon the assessing authority. In the absence of any material to show the date of service of said order upon the assessing authority or the period of stay, if any, which has to be excluded in computing the limitation, this Court is at a loss to record any finding in this regard. Sri Saksena has relied upon 1988 UPTC 1238 Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., ....