9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 845X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 13 of the Uttar Pradesh Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2007 (hereinafter called as "Act of 2007"), assailing the order passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Kanpur Bench 3, Kanpur dated 01.06.2009 in Second Appeal No.12 of 2008 for assessment year 2004-05 (Entry Tax). 3. This revision was admitted on 09.09.2009 on the following questions of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that the applicant was covered within the expression 'Manufacturing Dealer' as used in the Notification dated 18.2.2003 (Annexure-2 to the Revision Application) issued under Section 4-B of the Uttar Pradesh Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000?" 4. Facts in nutshe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inery brought into the State were liable to entry tax. The State Government exercising power under Section 4-B of the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000 issued a Notification dated 08.02.2003, exempting from entry tax all class of small, medium and large manufacturing dealers, on entry of capital goods, plant, machinery and spare parts for use in their manufacture. 7. An assessment was made on 29.03.2007 for assessment year 2004-05 (Entry Tax), the assessing authority disallowed the claim of exemption made by Assessee and valued the plant, machinery etc. at Rs.1,53,65,061/- against disclosed value of Rs.1,27,37,568/-. It was taxed @ 5% and a demand of entry tax was made for Rs.7,68,253/-. Against the assessment order, a First Appeal No.5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he plant and machinery in question have been used to manufacture any goods, the sole issue is as to the identity of the person, who is engaged in manufacturing these goods. He then contended that the actual manufacturer of goods inside the State is the person who affects the first sale of goods so manufactured and not any other person in the manufacture. 10. From the records, it is apparent that M/s ICI India did not make sale of goods actually manufactured by it, or they can sale as per Toll Conversion Agreement, and it was the Assessee who made first sale of goods manufactured by M/s ICI India on job work basis by using the machinery in question. Learned counsel then contended that notification provides for all class of small, medium and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch is situated at the site of M/s ICI and the plant and machinery purchased by the Assessee and brought to the premises of M/s ICI cannot be said to have manufactured the goods, for which the exemption of entry tax could be passed on. 13. According to learned Standing Counsel the Assessee is not a manufacturing dealer and thus, not entitled to the exemptions given in Notification of 2003. 14. I have heard the counsel for respective parties and perused the material on record. 15. The short controversy engaging the attention of the Court is as to whether the Assessee is covered within the expression "Manufacturing Dealer" used in Notification dated 18.02.2003 issued under Section 4-B of the Uttar Pradesh Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used in the Act of 2000 and have not been defined shall have the meaning assigned to them under the Act 1948. 19. The words "Manufacture" and "Manufacturer" have not been defined under the Entry Tax Act either of the year 2000 which was repealed and subsequently, enacted by the Act of 2007. The word "Manufacturer" has been defined under the Act of 1948 which means in relation to any goods, the dealer who makes the first sale of the goods in State after their manufacture. The Notification dated 18.02.2003 which provides benefit to a manufacturing dealer of entry on capital goods, plant, machinery and spare parts into local area from any place outside the local area for use in their manufacturing has to be construed in harmony with the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oil. The Court held that in order to be a manufacturer, it is not necessary that person himself must manufacturer. 24. This Court held that work got done on job work by an Assessee is the work for the Assessee. It is wholly immaterial whether raw material is consumed by the Assessee himself, or he gets the goods manufactured from the agency of other persons on job work. 25. In the instant case, the Assessee had brought capital goods inside the State, which was used for manufacture of catalyst on basis of job work done by M/s ICI, who was manufacturing catalyst only for the Assessee and for no other party. M/s ICI was charging for the manufacture of catalyst from the Assessee and was not making the sale and thus, cannot be termed as manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
