TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly in Second Appeal No. 45/2021 for the Assessment Year 2007-08 arising out the proceedings under the UP VAT Act. 3. The above-noted revision was admitted by this Court vide order dated 28.08.2023 on the following questions of law:- "A. Whether the Tribunal was justified in affirming the Reversal of Input Tax Credit on merits, even after recording the finding that the First Appellate Authority has failed to deal with the issue of RITC, though it having been specifically raised and argued by the applicant before the First Appellate Authority? B. Whether the Tribunal was justified in affirming the Reversal of Input Tax Credit merely on the basis of ex-party reports having been furnished by the assessing authorities of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Meerut. The transactions were made through banking channel and of the selling dealers were duly registered at the time of transaction being undertaken. Aggrieved by the said order, the revisionist preferred first appeal, which was partly allowed vide order dated 27.08.2018. Still feeling aggrieved, the revisionist preferred second appeal before the Tribunal, which has been allowed partly vide impugned order dated 22.05.2023. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that merely on the ground that the registrations of the selling dealers have subsequently been cancelled, the same cannot be used against the revisionist for RITC. She further submits that no adverse material has been placed on record for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld not be verified. He further submits that the Tribunal, being the last court of fact and law, has rightly only partly allowed the appeal. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. 8. It is not in dispute that on 02.02.2008, the goods of the revisionist were seized. After seizure on the very day, the business premises of the revisionist was surveyed. At the time of survey, no business activity was found and it was recorded that the revisionist does not have any godown. So far as the penalty proceedings under section 54(1)(14) of the Act are concerned, the same have been dropped and no adverse material has been brought on record on behalf of the Revenue to show that the penalty order dropping ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y on the ground that selling dealers' registrations have been cancelled. The revisionist has brought on record material not only shows that at the time of transaction, the selling dealers were having valid registrations, but also the transactions have been made through banking channel and other papers brought on record shows actual physical movement of goods upto the place of the revisionist. Further, it is not in dispute that on the date of transaction, both selling dealers were duly registered. 12. Once it is not in dispute or any cogent material has been brought on record by the Revenue showing that the registrations of the selling dealers were cancelled after the date of transaction, benefit of ITC cannot be denied. In other words, o....