TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nter-parties case of COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, UP., LUCKNOW VERSUS SHRI MAHAVEER ROLLING MILLS (P) LTD. [ 2010 (5) TMI 754 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ] where it was held that The dealer, M/s. Mahaveer Iron Industry Pvt. Ltd., who has been given full exemption under section 4A of the Act was assessed to tax on the material sold to the assessee/revisionist and the tax so assessed on the sale of the said goods was deducted from his eligibility amount. Accordingly, it amounts to the payment of tax by way of adjustment. Section 4BB has not prescribed the manner of payment of tax and manner of payment cannot be confined to payment by actual tender but it would include payment of tax by adjustment also. In favour of assessee. Petition allowed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in law in not allowing the benefit of setting off of tax on finished goods under section 4-BB of the Act despite the fact that the revisionist fulfilled the requisite conditions for the same and the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the preceding assessment year 1998-99 has already allowed the benefit of the same? Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned order of the Tribunal is sustainable under law specially when the same has been passed in utter ignorance of the material on record and by recording erroneous and perverse findings? The facts of the case are that the revisionist is a Private Limited Company and engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of iron and steel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dustry, who was granted exemption under section 4-A of the Act and on the strength of the exemption being granted, the revisionist became entitled as per the provisions of section 4-BB of the Act to claim the benefit as provided therein and the claim has wrongly been rejected upto the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that the issue involved in the present revisions has already been decided by this Court in the inter-parties case of the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow Vs. S/s Shri Mahaveer Rolling Mills (P) Ltd., Kanpur (2010 UPTC 977); wherein, following observation has been made:- Section 4-A of the Act permits exemption to new dealers/ manufacturers from payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee on the sale of the finished goods. However, the said deduction/set off was refused to the assessee by the assessing authority on the ground that there is no actual payment of tax on sale/purchase of the raw material. Tribunal however, has reversed the same and has allowed the said deduction/ set off to the assessee. In the back drop of the above facts and circumstances the following question of law has been raised for determination in this revision. Whether under the facts and circumstances the assessee is entitle to set off under section 4-BB of the Act from the gross turnover of the purchase value of the raw material which the assessee has purchased from the dealer who is ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not exceed the amount of tax payable separately under this Act or the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 The submission of the learned Standing counsel is that Section 4-BB stipulates payment of actual tax for the purposes of grant of set off/ deduction and as there is no actual payment, the tribunal erred in allowing the said benefit to the assessee. In rebutting the above argument Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the assessee has submitted that for the purposes of benefit of Section 4-BB of the Act the mode and manner of payment of tax is immaterial. What is relevant is assessment and payment of tax on the purchase/ sale of raw material or packing material. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l / packing material from the dealer Mahaveer Rolling Mills ( P) Ltd. which is fully exempt from payment of tax under Section 4 -A of the Act was not legally justified and as such the tribunal committed no error of law in allowing the said benefit to the assessee by the order impugned. The Apex Court in the case of Punjab and others Vs. Perfect Synthetics and others, 2008 (3) SCC 702 while dealing with a similar situation in connection with the Punjab General Sales Tax ( Deferment and Exemption) Rules, 1991, has observed that the exemption is given to the dealers and not to the goods and that the assessment of tax of the dealer and deduction of the same from the eligibility amount amounts to payment of tax. Similar is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
