9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted to the dealer. The impugned order fails to record any reason that would justify the cancellation of the eligibility certificate. - - - - - Dated:- 24-10-2007 - BHARATI SAPRU , J. MS. BHARATI SAPRU J. Heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Bharatji Agrawal assisted by Shri Piyush Agrawal for the revisionist and Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State. This revision petition has been filed by the revisionist against the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal dated December 26, 2002 by which the Trade Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revisionist before the Trade Tax Tribunal, being Appeal No. 120 of 1998 and has confirmed the order of the Commissioner, Trade Tax dated March 23, 1998 by which the eligibility certifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow by its order dated July 21, 1989 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Commissioner under section 4A(3) and remanded the case to the Commissioner of Trade Tax for decision afresh after giving to the revisionist a proper opportunity of hearing. Thereafter, another order was passed on January 5, 1992 under section 4A(3) by which the eligibility certificate was cancelled. The revisionist again filed an appeal, which was allowed on August 21, 1995. Thereafter, another order was passed on March 23, 1998 under section 4A(3) cancelling the eligibility certificate on the ground of misuse. The order dated March 23, 1998 has been placed on record by the revisionist as ann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... television sets as well as black and white television sets. In pursuance to the grant of exemption certificate, the revisionist did not either realise any tax nor deposited any tax during the said period. On May 10, 1988 the Commissioner of Trade Tax initiated proceedings under section 4A(3) of the Act for withdrawal of the eligibility certificate on allegations of misuse of the eligibility certificate. Against the order dated May 10, 1988, the present revisionist filed an appeal under section 10 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow by its order dated July 21, 1989 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Commissioner under section 4A(3) and remanded the case to the Commissioner of Trade Tax for decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods for a period exceeding six months at a stretch in any assessment year. The second argument of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that although the order of cancellation records that television sets were being imported from outside, no allegation of misuse of the exemption certificate has been made against the revisionist as the order of cancellation dated March 23, 1998 does not record that the revisionist had claimed any exemption on the T.V. sets which had been imported from outside. Learned counsel for the revisionist also argued that the grant of exemption certificate to the manufacturer, i.e., the revisionist did not preclude it from indulging any trading activity and, therefore, the mere fact that the revisionist ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of exemption had been made. Secondly, he has argued once more in reply that it is nowhere on record that the company has ceased to be in production for a period of six months. Learned counsel for the revisionist has also argued that even the Tribunal, while passing this order, has not come to the conclusion that the revisionist has ceased to be in production for a period of six months and that is why, in the concluding portion, the Tribunal has recorded that even if it were to accept the version of the learned counsel for the revisionist that the unit was not closed for a continuous period of six months, there was evidence before the Tribunal to come to the conclusion that the revisionist has misused the eligibility certificate by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e material on record as well as the order of cancellation of the exemption certificate and the impugned order of the Tribunal dated December 26, 2002. There is substance in the argument made by the learned counsel for the revisionist. Two things are clear. Firstly, there is no finding against the revisionist that he has ceased production for a continuous period of six months so as to withdraw the eligibility certificate in view of the stipulation of the notification under which, it was granted. Secondly, there is no allegation against the revisionist whereunder findings have been recorded against the revisionist that the revisionist had availed exemptions on the T.V. sets, which were imported by him from outside. Such being the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
