2022 (1) TMI 196

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax Tribunal, Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 309 of 2012 (A.Y. 2010-11) and Second Appeal No. 310 of 2012 (A.Y. 2011- 12), under Section 28 of UP VAT Act. 3. The following common questions of law have been framed in both the present revisions:- "A- Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal as well as the authorities below were justified in not considering the affidavit of Shri Jagdish Prasad and Jangi Lal which were filed before the assessing authority and were pressed before the Ist appellate authoritity as well as before the Tribunal ? B- Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal as well as the authorities below were justified in rejecting the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Grits and Sand. The survey was conducted on 18.7.2011. The Proprietor of the firm was not present during survey, therefore, the books of account could not be shown. Certain loose parchas were seized on the basis of which adverse inference was drawn by the assessing authority. To controvert the said fact that the parchas which were found, were not connected with the business of the applicant, the affidavit was filed to prove that the goods / material found during survey were of different persons and not connected with the business of the applicant. The Tribunal without looking into the said affidavit, have just made the passing remark which is quoted below:- 8. The Tribunal has just referred the observations of the assessing authority w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sector-3, Mirzapur and is authorized to file the above counter affidavit and as such is conversant with the facts being deposed herein below. 2. That this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.11.2013, directed for filing a counter affidavit in the above revision particularly informing the fact that the affidavits filed on behalf of the assessee were considered or not by the authorities below during the proceedings. 3. That a perusal of the record of the case shows that the assessee during the assessment proceedings filed Two affidavits one of the Jagdish Prasad S/o Purushottam Kesarwani, who stated that the stock found at the time of survey belonged to him, and the other of one Jaggi Lal Pal S/o Devta Pal who alleged that he....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the revision call for no comments and being matters of record be verified therefrom. 11. That in reply to the contents of paragraph nos. 17 and 18 of the revision it is submitted that the affidavits were duly considered by the assessing authority while passing the assessment order. 12. That the contents of paragraph no. 19 of the revision refers to the judgement passed by this Hon'ble Court and the same may be perused at the time of hearing of the revision. 13. That in reply to the contents of paragraph no. 20 of the revision, it is submitted that no question of law arises in the above revision and the same is liable to be dismissed by this Hon'ble Court." 11. On perusal of the said affidavit, it appears that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....‹à¤‚ की विवेचना के सम्बन्ध में आपत्ति की गयी है। अपीलार्थी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता द्वारा पायी गयी आपत्ति उचित प्रतीत नहीं होती है, क्योंकि कर निर....