TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1492
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(i)(c) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 19481. Following questions of law are referred by the Assessee for the opinion of this Court:- Substantial Questions of Law:- "I. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case when the assessing authority has held that it is inter-State sale, then whether he is justified in imposing penalty under Section 15-A (1) (c) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act ? II. Whether the order dated 31.03.2005, passed by the assessing authority, is of without jurisdiction and is illegal and learned Tribunal has failed to apply it's mind and has wrongly rejected the appeal of the revisionist? III. III. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the action of the assessing authority was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tax Act, 1948 is not justified and the assessment order and the order of all the authority below suffer from illegality. Brief facts of the case are that the revisionist is a manufacturer and Trader of craft paper. In the year 1996-97, the revisionist has claimed that it had affected the sale through stock transfer to its Ex. U.P. Consignment Agent for a sum of Rs. 19,70,161/-. According to the revisionist, the aforesaid stock transfer was duly accounted for and was covered by Form-F. A survey was conducted on 10.12.1996 and during the course of survey, it is noticed by the Survey Team that certain names and addresses of Ex. U.P. Purchasers were mentioned in the books of the revisionist namely in Exhibit-15. From the perusal of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the regular books of account which are mentioned by it. He has further submitted that no tax was evaded. He has also submitted that it is nothing but merely on the technicality to the extent that the names of certain firms were disclosed mentioned in the books of account, therefore, that will not make any difference to assess the entire transaction as inter-state sales. He has further submitted that the transaction in question was covered by Form-F and the goods were dispatched as stock transfer. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel supports the orders of the authorities below. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the orders passed by the authorities below and the impugned order of the Tribunal, I am of the opinio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding to the Tribunal, it is a case where during the course of survey, Exhibit 15 was recovered from the possession of the revisionists which clearly indicates the details of the purchasers duly mentioned prior to movement of goods, therefore, it was not a stock transfer as such it was inter-state sales. The transaction in question, therefore, is duly covered by the Second Part of sub-Section (c) of Section 15A(1). As the revisionist was well aware about the details of the purchasers, the Tribunal has further held that, it was a case, the revisionist has deliberately with ill intention tried to show that the sales are against Form-F, therefore, are stock transfer and not inter-state sales. The revisionist-assessee has claimed the transact....