2009 (11) TMI 842

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... first appellate authority reduced the tax liability to Rs. 8,36,381. Upon receiving certain information, the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) passed an order dated September 26, 1989, under section 21 of the Trade Tax Act, and imposed further tax to the tune of Rs. 16,800 on the transaction which had allegedly escaped assessment. Against the order dated September 26, 1989, the respondent-dealer preferred a first appeal, which was partly allowed vide order dated February 5, 1990, by which imposition of further tax pursuant to the order passed under section 21 of the Trade Tax Act, was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the assessing officer to pass fresh order according to the observations made in the order of the first appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Department has relied upon a decision of the apex court in the case of Kundan Lal Srikishan v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. reported in [1987] 65 STC 62; [1987] UPTC 404 which is as follows (at page 72 of STC): "We do not find any merit in the submission made on behalf of the Department that the order passed on January 18, 1980 should be understood as an order discharging the notice issued under section 21 of the Act and not an order of reassessment as such. This is obvious from the language of section 21 itself. Section 21 authorises the assessing authority to make an order of assessment or reassessment. It says that if the assessing authority has reason to believe that the whole or any part of the turnover of the dealer, for any asse....