TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the opposite parties. The cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of application is sufficient. The application is allowed. Order dated 27.2.2020 is corrected. The corrected order is as under:- 1. Heard Mr. Sanjieva Shankdhar, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Mr. Rohit Nandan Shukla, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The present revision is filed against the judgment and order dated 26.04.2019 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Lucknow in Second Appeal No. 171/2018, whereby allowing the Second Appeal filed by the Commissioner Commercial Tax, Lucknow. This revision pertains to the assessment year 2014- 15. 3. The instant revision h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) burden to prove classification in a particular entry is always on the Revenue; (c) any ambiguity has to be resolved in favour of the assessee; and (d) resort to residuary entry is to be taken as a last measure. 4. The revisionist is engaged in trade of Gain Measurement Instrument which are mostly purchased from outside the State and supplied to the clients within and outside Uttar Pradesh against Form 'C' and Form E1/C. Most of the customers of the revisionist are Government/ Public Sector units i.e. National Thermal Power Corporation (N.T.P.C.), SASAN Power Ltd. Noida Power Company Ltd. etc. and also submitted that revisionist is registered under the U.P. VAT Act Central Sales Tax Act. 5. With reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and levied tax holding the goods to be unclassified. 8. The order of the First Appellate Authority was successfully challenged by the revisionist before the Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeal) who has allowed the appeals by means of the order dated 26.05.2018. 9. The opposite parties being aggrieved by the said order preferred an appeal before the Full Bench of Commercial Tax Tribunal which has considered the contention of the revisionist and rejected the same by means of the impugned order dated 26.04.2019. Before the Tribunal the revisionist had placed copy of the expert report, rejected the same and found that goods being supplied by the revisionist could not be included in the category of Gain Measurement Instrument, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... category of Gain Measuring Instrument at the rate of 5%, while the Assessing Authority rejecting the contention of the revisionist has taxed the said instrument at the rate of 14% being unclassified items. The revisionist has produced the certificate of Dean Research Development, Electronics Engineering Department, Institute of Engineering and Technology Uttar Pradesh University, Sitapur Road, Lucknow. In support of his contention and the said certificate having been issued by expert body was required to be given due weightage and due consideration by the authorities below. 14. The Tribunal has, without given any cogent explanation, rejected the said report. It was clearly open for the Tribunal looking into the technical nature ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
