Amalgamated stock retains entry tax exemption; transferee company cannot be treated as a fresh purchaser or denied Form D.

After sanction of an amalgamation scheme, a transferee company that receives sugar stock already covered by a valid entry tax exemption cannot be denied the same benefit on the ground that the transfer amounts to a fresh purchase. The existing Form K and exemption attached to the stock remained effective, and the transferee stepped into the transferor's position for the relevant tax benefit. Requiring a separate certificate from the transferor, which had ceased to exist after amalgamation, was unjustified. The refusal to issue Form D was therefore held unsustainable, and the claimed exemption benefit was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after sanction of the amalgamation scheme, the transferee company was entitled to claim the same entry tax exemption and issuance of Form D in respect of the transferred sugar stock, and whether the authorities were justified in treating the transfer as a fresh purchase requiring a separate certificate from the transferor company.

Analysis: The exemption scheme under the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Area Act, 2007 and the Rules of 2008 permitted use of the prescribed declaration form for claiming exemption from entry tax on sugar manufactured during Crushing Season 2015-16. The record showed that Form K had already been issued for the relevant stock to the transferor company, that the remaining stock stood transferred to the transferee company pursuant to the approved scheme of amalgamation, and that the transferor company had ceased to exist upon amalgamation. In such a situation, the transferred stock could not be treated as a separate subsequent purchase merely because it came into the hands of the transferee company by operation of the amalgamation order. The earlier exemption attached to the stock and the transferee company stepped into the place of the transferor company for the relevant tax benefit.

Conclusion: The refusal to issue Form D was unjustified, and the transferee company was entitled to the same exemption benefit as the transferor company.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the impugned orders were set aside, and the relief claimed by the revisionist was granted.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a scheme of amalgamation has been sanctioned and the transferred goods were already covered by an existing statutory exemption, the transferee company cannot be denied the benefit by treating the transfer of the stock as a fresh purchase or by insisting on a redundant certificate from a company that has ceased to exist.

---