High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow v. Jyoti Class Works - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 933 of 1995  RD-AH 581 (18 August 2004)
TRADE TAX REVISION NO.933 OF 1995
The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow. ....Applicant
S/S Jyoti Glass Works, Varanasi. ....Opp.Party
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
Present revision under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") is directed against the order of Tribunal dated 05.07.1995 relating to the assessment year 1992-93.
Following questions have been raised:
"1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances as stated above, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to reduce the taxable turnover of the dealer, despite the fact that incriminating evidences on record indicate otherwise ?
2) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to set aside the tax imposed by the assessing authority on the purchase of old broken glass pieces, under section 3-AAAA falls under the category of old discarded or unserviceable obsolete machinery stores, or vehicles including waste products......and is taxable ?"
Heard learned Standing Counsel. I have perused the order of Tribunal and the authorities below.
For the rejection of turn over, Tribunal has considered the material available on record and estimated the turn over. Estimate of turn over is question of fact, unless shown to be arbitrary and without any basis. Learned Standing Counsel is not able to show that the estimate of turn over is arbitrary and without any basis. Therefore, estimate made by the Tribunal is upheld.
So far as second question is concerned, applicant had purchased old broken glass pieces from unregistered dealer, which was assessed by the assessing authority under section 3-AAAA on the ground that broken glass was liable to tax at the point of sale to consumers under the entry of "Old discarded or unserviceable obsolete machinery stores, or vehicles including waste products". Tribunal held that broken glass pieces is neither machinery nor stores or vehicles nor waste product and therefore, is not covered under the aforesaid entry of "old discarded or unserviceable obsolete machinery stores, or vehicles including waste products".
Learned Standing Counsel submitted that broken glass is covered under "waste product". I afraid to accept the submission of learned Standing Counsel. In the case of J.J. Enterprises Vs. CTT, reported in 1996 UPTC, 471 Division Bench of this Court has held that a product, which is obtained as result of manufacturing process as a waste is "waste product". In the present case, applicant was manufacturer of bottles and purchased broken glass pieces as raw material. It is not obtained in the process as a waste product. Therefore, Tribunal has rightly held that the broken glass is not covered under the entry of "Old discarded or unserviceable obsolete machinery stores, or vehicles including waste products". Since it is not covered under the aforesaid entry, it is not liable to tax at the point of sales to consumers and the provision of section 3-AAAA does not apply.
In the result, revision fails and is accordingly, dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.