The burden of proof lies with the assessing authority to establish non-genuineness or misuse of forms, and the selling dealer's duty is to ensure no detectable defects on the forms.

( 1 ) THIS revision under Section 11 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the act") is directed against the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur, dated November 3, 1990 relating to assessment year 1984-85 arising out of the proceedings under Section 21 of the act.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are that the applicant is a manufacturer and a dealer of papers. During the year under consideration, the applicant had sold papers to various parties against form III-B. On the basis of form III-B received from various purchasers, the applicant had claimed exemption during the assessment proceedings. The assessing authority while passing original assessment order had granted exemption on the basis of form III-B to the applicant. Subsequently, the assessing authority received information from various assessing authorities of the dealer who had issued forms in some cases that the alleged forms had not been issued to such dealer and in some cases the recognition certificate under Section 4-B was can- celled prior to the date of transaction and in some cases the record of issuing dealer shows that the alleged forms had been issued to the different parties for different amount than the amount shown in the forms. On the basis of such information, proceeding under Section 21 was initiated and the case had been reopened. The reopening of the case is not in dispute. During the course of proceedings under Section 21, a show cause notice dated September 27, 1989 was issued. The said show cause notice was replied by the applicant. On the consideration of the show cause notice and its reply, the assessing authority vide its order dated September 30, 1989 passed the assessment order. The assessing authority had disallowed the claim of exemption against the forms III-B to the extent of Rs. 77,02,180 and levied tax at Rs. 4,85,237. 35. The dealer filed appeal before the deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Saharanpur which was allowed in part. The applicant filed second appeal before the Tribunal, Saharanpur, which was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal has been filed.

( 3 ) DURING the course of hearing by this Court on March 11, 2003, the Standing Counsel was directed to produce the assessment record and to file copies of disputed forms. The Standing counsel filed counter-affidavit, in which, a details of disputed forms against which the claim was disallowed and reasons for disallowed was also stated. The photostat copies of form III-B was also submitted on the basis of which, exemption was claimed, along with the letters of various assessing authorities, by which, the information was given about the disputed forms III-B. I have heard Sri Bharatji Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate and Sri U. K. Pandey, learned standing Counsel.

( 4 ) THE details of disputed form III-B and the reasons for disallowance as stated in the counter-affidavit are as follows :

( 5 ) S/sri Kumar Packers, The form III-Kha No. 154525 was meerut issued for Rs. 10,604 and forform III-Kha Disallowed Rs. 8,344. An information wasno. amount. received that this form has been 154525 8,344 issued to dealer only for Rs. 10,604 and for rupees 8,344 anotherform no. 154526 was issued which have not been produced by thedealer and the revisionist has clubbed both the amount of Rs. 10,604and rs. 8,344 in form No. 154525and has failed to prove that onlyone form No. 154525 was issued bythe firm, hence, benefit of Rs. 8,344 was not accepted.

( 6 ) S/sri Bareilly King Indus-Rs. 84,816 was claimed onform tries, Bareilly. III-B No. 123963 and in investiga-Form III-Kha Disallowed tion it was found that this form no. amount. was issued only for Rs. 46,244 and123963 38,572 for Rs. 38,572 no other form iii-Kha has been produced by therevisionist, hence, no benefit has been ( 7 ) S/sri Envelop India Co. the bareilly. III-Kha form III-Kha Disallowed for no. amount. revi126788 amount74,518 andassessingtheprove thatto benefit has

( 8 ) S/