Concessional purchase declaration remains valid where raw material is used for the certified manufacturing activity, despite later exemption claim

A concessional purchase declaration is not false merely because the finished goods are later described as a different exempt product, if the raw material was in fact used to manufacture the product covered by the recognition certificate. On the stated facts, pig iron purchased on form III-B was used to make cast iron castings, which were within the certificate, so the declaration form could not be treated as wrong and no breach of the recognition certificate or section 4-B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was established. The claimed exemption on the sale of the finished goods did not by itself show misuse of the concessional purchase form.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declaration form used for purchase of pig iron was false or wrong on the ground that the purchased goods were used in manufacturing cast iron castings which were claimed as agricultural implements, and whether such use amounted to violation of the recognition certificate and section 4-B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The dealer held a recognition certificate for manufacture of cast iron castings. The finding of the Tribunal was that the pig iron purchased against form III-B was used in the manufacture of cast iron castings, and that finding was not successfully assailed. Once the purchases were made for manufacture of the product covered by the recognition certificate, the declaration form could not be treated as false or wrong merely because the final product was later claimed as an agricultural implement and exemption was sought on its sale. The claimed exemption did not, by itself, establish breach of the certificate or misuse of the concessional purchase form.

Conclusion: The declaration form was not false or wrong, and there was no violation of section 4-B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The revision was liable to be dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal's view that the concessional purchase was valid was sustained, and the assessee's position prevailed.

Ratio Decidendi: A purchase declaration cannot be treated as false merely because the manufactured goods are later claimed to be exempt as a different product, where the purchased material was in fact used in manufacturing the product covered by the recognition certificate.

---