Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2009 (11) TMI 861

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this common order. In all the revisions, during the assessment years under consideration, the assessees were engaged in the manufacture and sale of rice. Each assessee was enjoying the eligibility certificate issued under section 4A of the Trade Tax Act for a particular period or tax rebate on the fixed capital investment as mentioned in the relevant certificate. The assessees have purchased the paddy as raw material and paid the tax. The assessees have claimed the set-off of the tax already paid on the paddy as per section 4BB before getting the benefit in the computation to be made under section 4A of the U. P. Trade Tax Act. The same was allowed in a few cases by the assessing officer. However, in a few cases, it was not allowed. Whe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l before the first appellate authority who has allowed the claim of the assessee. Not being satisfied, the Department has filed an appeal before the Trade Tax Tribunal who vide its impugned order has allowed the appeals filed by the Department and wrongly denied the benefit given by the first appellate authority. He further submitted that a Division Bench of the Tribunal has earlier decided a few appeals on the merits in similar situation and has allowed the claim of the assessees. For this purpose, he has drawn the attention to the order passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal in the case of Commissioner Trade Tax v. Sri Bhagwan Rishab Nath (Second Appeal Nos. 298 and 299 of 2005). However, he submitted that the single member who was the part of ....