9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (7) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ptember, 1981, under Notification No. 332, dated 15th November, 1971 and for the latter period it had taxed at 6 per cent under the Notification No. 5785, dated 7th September, 1981. The Deputy Commissioner (Executive) in exercise of the powers under section 10B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act') held that the bitumenised waterproof paper was not paper but a paper product and, therefore, revised the order passed by the assessing authority taxing its sale as an unclassified item at 8 per cent. The applicant approached the Sales Tax Tribunal but its appeals were dismissed by means of the impugned order dated 22nd June, 1989. It is against this order that the applicant has come up in revision. Before proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on he also placed his reliance on a decision of this Court given in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Adarsh Paper and Board Manufacturing Company [1987] 65 STC 243; 1985 UPTC 15. In this decision it has been held that mill board which was also used for packing fell within the ambit of the notification dated 15th November, 1971, referred to above. He also referred to a Division Bench decision of the Madras High Court given in the case of Viny Pap Sales Depot v. State of Tamil Nadu [1977] 40 STC 317. In the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the entry was "paper of all sorts (including......) ". The question for consideration before the Madras High Court was whether P.V.C. coated paper which is also used for packing purposes fell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is bitumenised packing paper". The learned Standing Counsel also placed his reliance on two decisions of this Court given in the cases of Mahabir Industries v. State of U.P. [1987] 65 STC 251 (All.); 1986 UPTC 369 and Fine Straw & Cardboard Factory (P) Ltd. v. State of U.P. 1988 UPTC 277. Both the decisions are under section 4-B of the Act wherein recognition certificate was granted to a manufacturer for procuring raw materials on concessional rates. These decisions do not apply to the controversy in question which has to be seen in the light of charging section, namely, sections 3 and 3-A of the Act. The Tribunal did refer to the said two decisions (Commissioner of Sales Tax v. S.S. Adarsh Paper and Board Manufacturing Company [1987] 65 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
