B. Amit Sthalekar, J. - (1.) THIS trade tax revision arises out of the order passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow dated 16.06.2000 although in the memo of revision it has wrongly been mentioned as having been passed by Sri V.N.S. Tripathi in Assessee Appeal No. 377 of 1993 under Section 10 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act.
(2.) THIS is a revision filed by the revisionist on the following question of law: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to quash the assessment order dated 16.01.1992 under Section - 21 of the Act in view of the opinion expressed in lines 6 to 7 on page -6 of the order that the reduction by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal) in the turnover assessed under Section - 21 of the Act was uncalled for - An order of assessment was passed by the Assessing authority for the year 1983 -84 against the respondents Sri Niwas Ji Oil Refiners Pvt. Ltd. Aggrieved the respondent filed an appeal No. 429 of 1993. The assessee also filed an appeal No. 377 of 1993. These appeals were principally directed with regard to the findings recorded by the Assessing Authority under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1948). There was a difference of opinion between the two members constituting the Tribunal, namely, Sri V.N.S. Tripathi and Sri Q.A. Naqvi. Sri Q.A. Naqvi gave his opinion on 24.02.2000 and Sri V.N.S. Tripathi gave his opinion on 22.03.2000 on the findings with regard to Section 21 of the Act, 1948. The matter was referred by the Chairman of the Tribunal under Section 10(12) of the Act, 1948 to a 3rd member Sri P.K. Jain. Sri P.K. Jain gave his opinion on 03.06.2000 concurring with the opinion of Sri Q.A. Naqvi which was thereafter accepted by a bench of a Tribunal comprising Sri S.A. Siddhiqui and Sri Q.A. Naqvi. The assessee's appeal No. 377 of 1993 for the assessment year 1983 -84 was accepted on the point of the assessment proceedings being barred by time in view of the provisions of Section 21 of the Act, 1948.
(3.) I have heard Sri S.M.K. Chaudhary, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vaibhav Pandey, for the respondents and Sri Sanjeev Shankhdhar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the revisionist.;