TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (3) TMI 509
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... effect from April 1, 1982 and was granted power connection on August 23, 1982 of minimum 5 H.P. load which is usually sanctioned for a commercial establishment, situate in an industrial area. It is averred that since the petitioner started its business as a dealer in the industrial area, minimum 5 H.P. load was sanctioned though no industry was set up in the industrial area at that time. Attracted by a scheme dated September 30, 1982 (annexure 1 to the supplementary-affidavit), it is averred that the petitioner established a unit in the industrial area for the manufacture of single super phosphate during the period commencing from October 1, 1982 to October 18, 1982 and raw material was purchased on October 2, 1982 which was utilised on Oc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... started its production on October 2, 1982 when raw material was purchased and prior to that the petitioner was simply a dealer in chemical fertilizer, acid, chemicals, etc. In para 7 of the counter-affidavit, it is averred that the petitioner made purchases of raw material on July 2, 1982 and obtained power connection on August 23, 1982 and, therefore, the date of granting power connection was the date of starting production in the case of the petitioner. 4.. Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the date of starting production in the case of the petitioner has to be determined in the light of the rules which are contained in the Government order dated September 30, 1982 (annexure 2 to the supplementary....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal emphasis upon the actual date of production. We find force in the submission of Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal. When specific rules are made governing the date of starting production, there is no warrant to take resort to an artificial definition of the date of starting production. 5.. In para 5 of the supplementary-counter-affidavit reference has been made to the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984 (U.P. Act No. 22 of 1984) which shall be deemed to have come into force on October 12, 1983. Section 5 of the Amendment Act of 1984 substituted Explanation (ii) to section 4-A as follows: "(ii) 'date of starting production' means the date on which any raw material required for use in the manufacture or packing of the specifie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....starting production. 7.. We are, therefore, of the view that the provisions of the amending Act No. 22 of 1984 cannot be pressed into service to determine the date of starting production in the case of the petitioner as the Act was deemed to have come into force on October 12, 1983, that is, much after the date of starting production set up by the parties in this case. 8.. The scheme dated September 30, 1982 (annexure 1 to the supplementaryaffidavit) clearly states that if there is a dispute in regard to the date of starting production then a decision of the State Government would be final. From the impugned order dated May 3, 1991 (annexure 7 to the writ petition), it clearly appears that such dispute was referred to the State....