KAMAL FUELS Vs. COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Present revision under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act) is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 24.06.2004 arises from the proceeding under Section 4-A (3) of the Act relating to the assessment year 1984-85 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the applicant established a new unit for the manufacturing of coal briquettes in the year 1991. First sale was made on 06.04.1988. Applicant applied for exemption under Section 4-A of the Act. Divisional Level Committee after examination, issued the eligibility certificate and granted exemption on the turn over of the manufactured products namely coal briquettes for the period of five years from 06.04.1988 to 05.04.1993. Applicant was also issued recognition certificate under Section 4-B of the Act for making the purchases of the raw material at concessional rate, According to the applicant main raw material in the manufacturing of coal briquettes was coal dust and cement. As per certificate of Assistant Director of Small Scale Industries Development Organisation. Government of India dated 30.07.1987 written to General Manager. District Industries Center, Devas, Madhya Pradesh, which is at page No. 59 of the revision, percentage of the coal was between 80% to 84% and cement 20% to 16%. Survey was made by the STO (SIB) Trade Tax, Muzaffarnagar on 30.07. 1992 at the manufacturing unit of the applicant. At the time of survey machines were found installed and the manufacturing process was going on and the stock of finished goods and the raw material were found. At the time of survey one diary was seized from one Sri Satyendra Kumar, alleged to be a supervisor. In the diary, entry of cement and the manufactured quantity of coal briquettes, were found. On the basis of the entries, found in the diary, it was inferred that the applicant had not utilized the cement purchased at the concessional rate in the manufacturing of coal briquettes and had sold it. With the view that the applicant had misused the eligibility certificate, a notice under Section 4-A (3) of the Act was issued on 14/16.09.1994. It appears that in pursuance of the notice, ex-parte order under Section 4-A (3) was passed on 26.12.1996 cancelling the eligibility certificate issued to the applicant w.e.f. 24.12.1991. Against the said order, applicant filed appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal vide its order dated 03.06.1999 allowed the appeal set aside the order dated 26.12.1996 and remanded back the matter to the Commissioner, Trade tax to decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity to the applicant. Thereafter, applicant had filed reply to the show cause notice. Commissioner of Trade Tax however, had not accepted the plea of the applicant and passed the order under Section 4-A (3) of the Act on 07.02.2000. Commissioner of Trade Tax cancelled the eligibility certificate w.e.f. 24.12.1991 for the future period. Commissioner of Trade Tax was of the view that the perusal of the entries made in the diary shows that the cement purchased at the concessional rate were not utilized in the manufacturing of the final product and had been sold as such and accordingly misused the eligibility certificate. Applicant filed appeal before the Tribunal. Written Statement dated 04.06.2004 was filed before the Tribunal which is No. 8 to the revision. Tribunal vide order dated 24.06.2004 rejected the appeal.

(3.) Heard Spanned counsel for the parties.