2020 (11) TMI 794
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....N'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA,J. Heard Sri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the Department and Sri Subham Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondents. The present revision has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 7.7.2020 passed by the Tax Tribunal in respect of the respondents for the assessment year 2014-15 under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act. It was alleged that respondent was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....im of the dealer and assessed amount of tax recoverable from the dealer at Rs. 6,35,44,426/-. The whole exercise was done on the basis of the Tax Audit report. Aggrieved against the said order, the assessee, the respondent herein, filed a First Appeal No. ALL1/0138/2020. During the course of the hearing of the said appeal, the dealer produced evidences with regard to the transportation of go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ngly, the appeal stood dismissed. The Tribunal also recorded that insofar as the revenue loss was concerned, the entire exercise was revenue neutral inasmuch the dealer had paid the tax, which is payable in respect of the purchase from unregistered dealers. Aggrieved against the said judgment dated 7.7.2020, the present revision has been filed. Sri B.K. Pandey, counsel for the Department has....
TaxTMI