TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l No. 846 of 2013 for the assessment year 2010-11 VAT Act, Servesri Ekdant Pipes Private Ltd. V/s Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P., whereby Bench II of Commercial Tax Tribunal, Lucknow has dismissed said two appeals filed against the order dated 31.08.2013 passed by First Appellate Authority in Appeal No. 1085 of 2013 Vat Act and Appeal No. 1014 of 2013 U.P. Entry Tax Act arising out of two assessment orders made under said two acts for year 2010-11. I have heard learned counsel for the assessee as well as learned Chief Standing Counsel. Both parties agreed that revision should be disposed of finally on merits. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that the Tribunal has decided above two second appeals by impugned common j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er dated 07.12.2012 passed under Entry Tax Act. Even then he has levied entry tax on cement fixing turn over of Rs. 10 lacs. Thus it is apparent that the levy of entry tax on cement in the impugned assessment order is against law but neither First Appellant Authority nor tribunal has considered this aspect and has wrongly upheld the assessment order passed under Entry Tax Act without application of mind. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that rate of entry tax on saria is 1% but Assessment Officer has levied entry tax on saria at the rate of 2%. The levy of entry tax at the rate of 2% is against Uttar Pradesh Governments' Notification No. KA.NI.-2-2757/XI-9(1)/08-U.P.Act-30-2007-Order-(31) 2008, but neither Tribunal nor Firs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urvey report that at the time of survey the work in the factory of assessee was over and labourers had gone. Therefore, there appears reasonable ground for non-production of account books at the time of survey. It has been alleged in the impugned assessment order as well as in judgements of First Appellate Authority and Tribunal that there was a difference between the stock entered in account books of assessee and stock found at the time of survey. In this respect assessee has filed his explanation on 12.10.2002 annexure 2 before AC - SIB Range, Lucknow in which he has specifically contended that point no. 2 of survey report relating to 2.5 Diameter is incorrect because there is no size of 2.5 Diameter. In his explanation the assessee ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ween the stock allegedly found at the time of survey and stock entered into account books. Thus it is clear that learned Tribunal has accepted rejection of books without considering relevant and important point raised by assessee. Assessee has shown his accepted turn over for the year 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 as follows:- 1. 2006-07 Rs. 98,28,337.24 2. 2007-08 Rs. 51,68,501.56 3. 2008-09 Rs. 20,78,008.59 4. 2009-10 Rs. 17,38,729.65 Perusal of impugned judgement of Tribunal shows that Tribunal has upheld turn over fixed by Assessment Officer on the ground that at the time of survey Jogesh employee of assessee informed that about 600 pipes are manufactured in a month. Besides this informati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment Officer is illegal and the assessment order passed by Assessment Officer is contrary to law but neither First Appellate Authority nor Tribunal has considered this aspect in their impugned judgments. It is also relevant to mention that according Government Notification No. KA.NI.-2-2757/XI-9(1)/08-U.P.Act-30-2007-Order-(31) 2008, dated 29th September, 2008 issued by Uttar Pradesh State Government entry tax is payable on saria at the rate of 1% but the Assessment Officer has levied entry tax on the turn over on saria at the rate of 2%. Thus entry tax levied on turn over of saria is against the said notification of State Government but First Appellate Authority as well as Tribunal has not considered this issue also in their impugned jud....