STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAJ METAL INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present First Appeals have been filed by the appellantState under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the Learned City Civil Court at Ahmedabad in Civil Suit Nos.5578 & 4178 of 1998 dated 31.07.1998 on the grounds stated in the memo of Appeal. Learned AGP, Mr.Dave has made an attempt to submit that the respondentoriginal plaintiffs were doing the job work and, therefore, the interpretation of Section(1)(ee) of the Bombay Electricity Duty (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1983 has not been properly made and, therefore, the Court below came to a conclusion that the plaintiffs, who are engaged in manufacturing, are industrial undertaking and not service undertaking. Learned AGP Mr.Dave submitted that even if they are manufacturing, they are doing job work and, therefore, in light of the amendment in the Act, if the process has been carried out at somebody's instance or instruction, it would be a job work and, therefore, the impact of tax liability would be as per the service undertaking and not the industrial undertaking.

(2.) Learned counsel, Mr.Mangukiya appearing for the respondentoriginal plaintiff has, however, referred to the papers and submitted that after considering the material and evidence, the Court below has given findings that the respondents are carrying out the manufacturing activity and it is also contended that the Gujarat Amendment (Gujarat Act), 17 of 1983 came into force with effect from 11th October, 1983 and the plaintiffs are treated as service undertaking upto July, 1987 and accordingly the bills, which have been sent, are erroneous. Learned counsel, Mr.Mangukiya stated that the plaintiffs have been engaged in some activity from the beginning and the classification as service industries for a limited purpose for the purpose of tax liability is completely contrary to the material and evidence. He submitted that the even the Collector of Electricity Duty has passed an order, wherein the unit of the plaintiffs has considered as industrial unit from 1987 and, therefore, merely because there is an amendment, it would not justify the clarification as service industries.

(3.) THEREFORE , there is no substance in the present First Appeals and the impugned judgment and order passed by the Learned City Civil Court at Ahmedabad in Civil Suit Nos.5578 & 4178 of 1998 dated 31.07.1998 does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the present First Appeal stand dismissed.