Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2025 (11) TMI 1333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....are identical, therefore, with the consent of the parties, both the revisions are decided by common judgment, treating STRE No. 420 of 2017 as leading case. Sales / Trade Tax Revision No. 420 of 2017 3. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 2.8.2017 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Agra Bench 1, Agra in Second Appeal No. 74 of 2015 (A.Y. 2010- 11). 4. The present revision has been admitted vide order dated 20.9.2017 on the substantial questions of law framed in the memo of revision. 5. Learned Senior counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of edible oil and maintained true and correct books of account. He submits that for manufacturin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed, which is verifiable from the supporting documents as well as from the books of account. He further submits that date to date manufacturing records were also maintained in the stock register and manufacture register etc but without considering the same, the impugned order has been passed. He submits that there is no violation of Rule 21 (1) sub clause (v) but without considering the same, by the impugned order, appeal has been rejected only placing reliance upon Rule 29 (2) & (3). He submits that matter requires re-consideration. 7. Per contra, learned ACSC supports the impugned order and submits that since the petitioner has failed to maintain its books of account for claiming the benefit, therefore, the order has rightly been passed....