2012 (5) TMI 562

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tanding Counsel, DR. SATISH CHANDRA J.-Both the revisions under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, have been preferred against the judgment and order dated November 27, 2003 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow in Second Appeal Nos. 316 of 1997 and 23 of 2000, for the assessment year 1992-93. The brief facts of the case are that the revisionist is a sole proprietorship firm, wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....34,000 vide order dated March 30, 1996. However, in first appeal, the first appellate authority vide his order dated May 26, 1997 again estimated the same and reduced the turnover to Rs. 4,48,800 and levied the tax of Rs. 44,880. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed Second Appeal No. 23 of 2000; and at the same time, the Department has also filed Cross Appeal No. 316 of 1997 before the Tribu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Tax [1988] UPTC 520 and Awadhesh Narain Singh v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1988] UPTC 68. The learned counsel further submits that firing period of 86 days is not based on survey, it is purely a gas work, which cannot be sustained as per the ratio laid down by this honourable court in the cases of Chawla Brick Field v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1987] UPTC 1377 and Om Prakash Vishnoi v. Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f accounts. The assessing officer has made the addition on estimate basis, which was reduced by the first appellate authority on estimate basis by giving the reasoning in his order. But the Tribunal has enhanced the addition to Rs. 39,225 in the departmental appeal again by estimating the sale but without any reason. Needless to mention that both the lower authorities have given the reasoning for ....