- (1.) Heard Sri Ratnesh Chandra holding brief of Dipak Seth, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sajay Sareen, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent.
(2.) The brief facts of the case as stated by learned Counsel for the revisionist are that Sri Chandramani Kant Singh, revisionist, is a descendant of Raja of Bhinga Raj in District - Bahraich (now district Shrawasti) and he has inherited the properties of the said Raj including the groves situated in various villages in the year 1982-83.
(3.) In view of the abovesaid background a notice under Section 7(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was issued to the revisionist for the assessment year 1982-83. In response to which the revisionist had submitted his reply, inter alia, stating therein that he is neither a "dealer" as defined under Section 2(c) of the Act nor the sale of standing green trees by way of auction was a business, so he is not liable to be assessed for tax under the provisions of trade tax. Further, initially the assessing authority after taking into consideration the provisions of Section 7(3) of the Trade Tax Act had passed the assessment order on the basis of the assessment. Thereafter, the order which was passed on the basis of assessment against the revisionist was confirmed by the appellate authority in the appeal and thereby by the Tribunal. After submission of reply and on the basis of material and documentary evidence on record the assessing authority passed the assessment order dated March 29,1985 for a tax of;