Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Shri B.K. Pandey, ACJ
State – Appellant
Versus
opposite party – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. assessment discussions, burden of proof under law (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 13 , 19) |
| 2. court’s observations on survey and accounting (Para 4 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. reiteration of the dealer's burden in maintaining proof (Para 14 , 15 , 18) |
| 4. final verdict on revisions and costs imposed (Para 20 , 21) |
1. Heard Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State - revisionist and Shri Vishwjit, learned counsel for the opposite party.
2. Sales / Trade Tax Revision No. 26 of 2023 relates to the Assessment Year 2016-17 under S.28(2) of the VAT Act, while Sales / Trade Tax Revision No. 27 of 2023 relates to the Assessment Year 2016-17 under S.9(4) of the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2007 . Since the issue involved in these two revisions are similar, therefore, the same are being decided by the common order.
3. The present revisions have been filed against the judgement & order dated 04.11.2022 passed by Commercial Tax Tribunal, Aligarh Division, Aligarh shifting the burden of proof upon the Department and partly allowing the appeals of the dealer, in which following questions of law have been framed: -
Sales / Trade Tax Revision No. 26 of 2023
(i) Whether on the fa
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
