9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... industries for a few years so as to encourage new industries being set up in the State. 4.. The petitioner is a partnership firm which established a new industrial unit for the manufacture of sodium silicate at its factory situate at Hapur Road, Meerut. The petitioner applied for registration with the Director of Industries as a small-scale industries and it was granted registration certificate dated August 6/7, 1984 by the Directorate of Industries, U.P., vide annexure 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner then applied for exemption under section 4-A vide annexure 2 to the writ petition. However, the respondent No. 2 rejected the petitioner's application under section 4-A on the ground that the petitioner had purchased a machine (Diges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls, Ghaziabad, for the assessment year 1982-83 vide annexure 5 to the writ petition. It was mentioned in the review application that since the order for fabrication of the Digestor was given by M/s. Nanda Chemicals, hence the said concern only gave challan to the petitioner but no bill was given. The Digestor was sent by the consignor M/s. Karim Engineering Works to the petitioner directly as consignee vide transport receipt annexure 6 to the writ petition. The petitioner specifically made a request in the review application that an enquiry be made by the Sales Tax Officer, Ghaziabad, regarding the closure of the business of M/s. Nanda Chemicals in December, 1982 and also as to whether M/s. Nanda Chemicals had ever sold the Digestor to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delivery of the Digestor had not been taken by it. The petitioner came into contact with M/s. Nanda Chemicals and it was agreed that the petitioner will pay the advance amount to the fabricator and take the delivery directly from it. True copy of the letter dated April 7, 1989 is annexure 10 to the writ petition. M/s. Karim Engineering Works had also issued a certificate dated April 7, 1989 stating that delivery of the said Digestor was taken by the petitioner vide annexure 11 to the writ petition. In spite of this voluminous evidence in favour of the petitioner the respondent No.2 rejected the review application by order dated March 30, 1991 annexure 12 to the writ petition. Aggrieved this writ petition has been in this Court. 9.. A cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cals, Ghaziabad, but this question has been totally ignored in the impugned order. The facts and evidence in the case clearly shows that the delivery was given by M/s. Karim Engineering Works directly to the petitioner and not to M/s. Nanda Chemicals as is evident from the letter of M/s. Nanda Chemicals dated April 7, 1989, annexure 10 to the writ petition and the certificate of M/s. Karim Engineering Works dated April 7, 1989, annexure 11 to the writ petition. Hence in our opinion the machinery (digestor) has to be held to be new and not old, and the observation to the contrary in the impugned order is wholly arbitrary, illegal and without any basis. 13.. In Ajay Engineering Corporation v. State of U.P. 1995 UPTC 1041 a division Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
