TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e process and not transferred. In our considered opinion, the said finding is binding upon the assessing authorities as the representation made by the Northern India Textile Processors Association was also decided by the said order. - Decided in favor of assessee. - Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1683 of 2007, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 296 of 2008, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1437 of 2008, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 454 of 2009, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 455 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 10-1-2013 - R. K. Agrawal And Ritu Raj Awasthi, JJ. ORDER (Delivered by the Court) Writ petition No. 1683 of 2007 has been filed by M/s Super Fine Processors Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Shri Surendra Lal Wassan seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 29.9.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Sector-2, Noida, district Gautam Budh Nagar, respondent no.3 under Rule 41(8) of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 filed as Annexure 10 to the writ petition and a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8) of the Rules and under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 2006-07 filed as Annexure 12 to the writ petition and a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 not to proceed against the petitioner for any realization of assessed amount of tax in pursuance of the aforesaid orders dated 18.12.2008. As all the writ petitions involve similar controversy they have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. Writ Petition No. 1683 of 2007 is being treated as the leading writ petition and its facts are given below:- The petitioner, M/s Super Fine Processors Pvt. Ltd., is a private limited company and is engaged in doing the job work of various textile manufacturers on gray fabrics which have been supplied to it by the manufacturer of the textiles only for the purposes of colouring, printing, bleaching, washing and dyeing of the gray cloth. Gray cloth is received by the petitioner from different manufacturers or looms. The petitioner is a registered dealer both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. For the purpose of doing job work and process of gray cloth it requi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rding to the petitioner another manufacturer, M/s Ganga Processors approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 1244 of 2005 (M/s Ganga Processors and others. vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein this Court vide order dated 13.9.2005 directed the State Government to consider the matter expeditiously and take a decision. Pursuant thereto the State Government vide order dated 7.10.2005 had taken a decision that there is no liability of trade tax on such activities. Despite the decision taken by the State Government on 7.10.2005 the respondent no.3 had passed the impugned order for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 imposing trade tax on dyes and chemicals consumed in the processing of gray cloth. The impugned order dated 29.9.2007 is under challenge on the grund that the decision taken by the State Government on 7.10.2005 that no tax is payable on the activities of job work undertaken by the similar manufacturers is binding on the assessing authority and, therefore, there is no question of imposition of any tax. In the counter affidavit filed by Sri K.K.Verma, Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-2, Noida on behalf of the respondents it has been stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nital vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax (1995 UPTC 1028); 2. Paper products Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2001) 247 ITR 128; 3. Commissioner of sales Tax, A.P. vs. M/s Indra Industries (2000 UPTC 472) 4. Raghunatyh Laxminarain Spices Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and others (2000 UPTC 554) 5. M/s Sir Shadi Lal Enterprises Ltd. Shamli vs. Union of India and others (2003 UPTC 696); 6. Union of India vs. Arviva Industries (I) Ltd. (2007 (209)E.L.T.5; and 7. State of Kerala and others vs. Kurian Abraham (P) Ltd. and another (2008) 3 SCC 582. Learned standing counsel however submitted that the decision was taken by the State Government vide order dated 7.10.2005 on the representation made by two manufacturers and not on the representations made by the petitioners or their Association and, therefore cannot be binding on the assessing authorities of other manufacturers. He further submitted that the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Matushree Textiles Ltd. (2004 NTN (25) 923, has held that under the deemed definition of word 'sale' dyes and chemical get transferred to gray cloth, therefore sale is effected and is liable to tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the representation dated 27.9.2005 made by the Northern India Textile Processors Association. It would be evident from the following recital in the order dated 7.10.2005 passed by the Principal Secretary, Tax and Registration Department, Government of U.P.: While holding that the dyes and chemicals are consumable and lost their existence in the process of colouring, deying etc. of gray cloth, the Principal Secretary has held as follows:- From a perusal of the aforesaid finding it is amply clear that the State Government had also decided the representation made by the Northern India Textile Processors Association and had come to the conclusion that dyes and chemical used in the bleaching, colouring and dyeing etc. on gray cloth are consumed in the process and not transferred. In our considered opinion, the said finding is binding upon the assessing authorities as the representation made by the Northern India Textile Processors Association was also decided by the said order. The stand taken by the respondents that the State Government had not decided any other representation except the two preferred by M/s Ganga Processors and M/s Style Dyers is not correct. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
