2010 (2) TMI 1096

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as "the Act").   The contention of the petitioner is that the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ghaziabad Zone, Ghaziabad, has issued the notices under section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred as, "the Trade Tax Act"). The petitioner filed the reply to the aforesaid notices, annexure 6 to the writ petition, but while passing the impugned orders, the submissions made in the reply have not been considered at all and the approval has been granted only in the interest of Revenue. He submitted that the orders are vitiated, inasmuch as the submissions have not been considered and, therefore, they are liable to be set aside. It is stated that provisions of the U.P. Trade Tax Act have been adopted by sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the submissions made in the reply have not been considered at all and the approval has been granted mechanically only in the interest of Revenue. Such orders cannot be sustained in the eye of law and are liable to be set aside. In the case of Ramayan Traders v. Additional Commissioner (Assessment III), Trade Tax, Bareilly reported in [2007] 35 NTN 31, which has been relied on by the subsequent Division Bench of this court in the case of Yadav Traders v. State of U.P. reported in [2010] 29 VST 107; [2009] UPTC 576. held as follows: "From a perusal of the aforesaid order, it would be seen that he has not dealt with any of the grounds given in the reply submitted by the petitioners. He has only given his conclusion. No finding has bee....