9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (4) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d claimed exemption and had moved for the issue of exemption certificates under section 4 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. These applications were rejected by the Sales Tax Officer. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), however, held that the assessees were entitled to exemption as "karkhanedars" under Notification No. ST-5263/X-902 (16)-52, dated 13th September, 1971 as amended by Notification No. ST-II8446/X-1(2)-75 dated 1st October, 1975 and Notification No. ST-II-8453/ X-1(2)-75, dated 1st October, 1975. Aggrieved against the orders passed by the first appellate authority, the Commissioner of Sales Tax preferred appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal but all the said appeals have been dismissed by the Sales Tax Tribunal. Aggrieved against the view taken by the Sales Tax Tribunal, the Commissioner of Sales Tax is in revisions before this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The contention raised by the learned Standing Counsel is that the Notification No. ST-II-7994/X-6(31)-1975-U.P. Act XV/48, Order-80, dated 30th September, 1980 which came into force on 1st October, 1980 will not apply in all these cases and the Tribunal is in error in referring to the same while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. ST-II-8449/X-1(2)-75, dated 1st October, 1975 (published in U.P. Gazette Extraordinary, dated 1st October, 1975): "In exercise of the powers under section 4 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (U.P. Act No. XV of 1948), the Governor is pleased to order that no tax under section 3-E of the said Act shall be payable with effect from May 21, 1974, by- (1) a dealer known as 'karkhanedar', who manufactures and sells art brasswares, brass utensils or parts thereof, in his own gulli, darja or para bhattis on the purchase of brass, copper, zinc or scrap thereof for use by him in the manufacture of such art brasswares, brass utensils or parts thereof, provided that such art brasswares and brass utensils or parts thereof are sold in an unfinished condition (as 'kora maal'), that is to say, without polishing, buffing, engraving or colouring (siyah kalam); (2) a dealer other than 'karkhanedar' on the purchase of the aforesaid unfinished goods (kora maal) provided that such art brasswares or brass utensils or parts thereof are sold, whether as such or after polishing, buffing, engraving or colouring (siyah kalam), within the State or in the course of inter-State trade or commer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the Notification No. ST-II-8453/X-1(2)-75, dated 1st October, 1975 the essential conditions are that a karkhanedar who is entitled to exemption should be a dealer (a) who manufactures his own utensils or art brasswares or parts thereof, (b) from his own raw materials and (c) sells the same without buffing, engraving, colouring or siyah kalam, etc. The assessees in these cases manufacture gullis and sillis out of the brass scrap and sell the same. The point raised on behalf of the department is that these gullis and sillis are neither utensils nor parts thereof and are not exempted by the Notification No. ST-11-8453/X-1(2)-75, dated 1st October, 1975. Elaborating his argument, the learned Standing Counsel states that it may be that in certain cases out of these gullis and sillis utensils may possibly be manufactured but when the assessee sells gullis and sillis as such, the same does not come within the term of "utensils" or parts thereof as used in the said notifications. In the submission of the learned Standing Counsel when a dealer manufactures gullis and sillis and stops at that, no manufacture of "utensils" come into existence. The contention raised by the learned Standi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was in dispute was the interpretation of the term "glasswares" within the meaning of notification dated April 1, 1960 (entry No. 10) as to whether the articles in question were parts of "glasswares" or not. In support of his contention learned counsel for the Commissioner of Sales Tax has also relied upon the case of Radha Ballabh Satish Chandra v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. 1987 UPTC 748 decided by me and has submitted that since in that case "brass circles " have been held to be not exempted from tax, therefore, sillis and gullis also are not exempted from tax. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as follows: "........... The contention raised is that brass circles are prepared from gullis and that when utensils prepared with gullis have been held to be exempted from tax, the brass circles prepared from gullis, i.e., a process in between the preparation of gullis and utensils stand exempted and that the circles from which the utensils are prepared should also be exempted ............" The Tribunal had observed in the impugned order of the said case that there is a rationale in the aforesaid argument made on behalf of the assessee that brass circles are prepare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Government of India which is only an official communication having no statutory sanction behind it can have any legal effect to hold the goods in question as oil-seeds as understood in common parlance and whether such an official communication is binding on the State Government." The Supreme Court after considering the rival contentions at (page 586 of STC) page 1564 held: "........... It is true the High Court has rightly observed that the aforesaid notification of the Government of India has no statutory force and as such is not binding on the Sales Tax Officer. It cannot, however, be denied that the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, is intimately conversant not only with the policy of legislation for the purpose of implementation of the provisions of the Central Act but is also familiar with the nature and quality of the commodities as also their use from time to time. If, therefore, such an authority issued a notification including certain commodities under the head of 'oil-seeds', as defined under the Central Act, it cannot be said that the Tribunal and the High Court were not right in preferring such an opinion of the Government as good evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
