2010 (2) TMI 1105

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petitioner was that the amount received from the company in respect of the part used for the repair of the vehicle during warranty period was not the part of the taxable turnover and not liable to tax. It appears that on the basis of the decision of the apex court in the case of Mohd. Ekram Khan & Sons v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, [2004] 136 STC 515; [2004] UPTC 1198, proceedings under section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") have been initiated for the assessment years 1999-2000 to 2002-03 and thereafter reassessment orders have been passed. The assessing authority has levied the tax on the amount received from the company in respect of the warranty claim. In the assessment order the assessed tax....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e relied upon the decision of the apex court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation [2002] 127 STC 258; [1999] UPTC 1 and a Division Bench decision of this court in the case of Annapurna Biscuit reported in [1982] 50 STC 56 (All); [1980] UPTC 1320. For 2003-04 also he submitted that the petitioner is not liable for interest under section 8(1) with effect from June 1, 2003 and liable to interest under section 8(1B) of the Act.   Sri U.K. Pandey, learned standing counsel, submitted that the learned single judge of this court in the year 2003 in the case of Commissioner of Trade Tax v. Mohammad Ekram Khan (T.T.R. No. 332 of 2001 dated April 25, 2003) of the Allahabad High Court has held that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the classification of the assessee's products. Such classification dispute is ordinarily resolved in assessment proceedings and, if resolved against the assessee, the assessee has to make payment of the differential amount of tax as required by sub-section (1A) failing which the provisions of sub-section (1B) apply. 6.. The requirement of sub-section (1) is that the assessee must pay tax on the amount of his turnover as particularised in the Explanation thereto. Interest under the provisions of sub-section (1) cannot be levied in respect of a dispute such as a classification dispute which is resolved only by the assessment. Sub-section (1) has no application to such a situation. 7.. Having regard to the conclusion that we reac....