TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (9) TMI 922
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s directed against an order dated September 3, 1997 passed by the said Tribunal in appeal No. 71 of 1997 whereby the Tribunal quashed an order passed by the Divisional Level Committee rejecting the respondent's application for the grant of an eligibility certificate. The Tribunal directed the Divisional Level Committee to issue an eligibility certificate. 4.. Revision Petition No. 56 of 1999 is directed against an order dated January 21, 1997 passed by the Tribunal in appeal No. 56 of 1997 whereby allowing the said appeal, the Tribunal set aside an order passed by the Divisional Level Committee rejecting the respondent's application for the grant of an eligibility certificate under section 4-A(3) of the Act and directing it to grant the same. 5.. Revision Petitions Nos. 7, 8 and 10 of 1998 are directed against an order dated September 26, 1997 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal whereby it set aside the orders passed by the Divisional Level Committee rejecting the applications of the respondents for the grant of an eligibility certificate and directed it to grant the same. 6.. The last revision petition, i.e., No. 95 of 1998 is directed against an order dated March 16, 1998 passed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er reiterated the line of reasonings adopted by the Commissioner. The Commissioner has observed that SSF is a kind of coal and that there was no dispute about it. There was no contest between the parties on this point in these revision petitions as well and it was admitted that SSF is also a kind of coal. The Commissioner has stated that SSF is prepared by removing smoke from the coal through some process and that the same process is adopted in the manufacture of coal briquettes also and that SSF and coal briquettes are both fuel. The Commissioner referred to a letter dated October 14, 1993 from the Government of U.P. in which the Government took the view that smokeless coal is a kind of coal and hence is an item prohibited by annexure II of the notification dated July 27, 1991. The Commissioner has not referred to any expert opinion on the point though the dealers had placed the same before him. The expert opinion is contained in a letter dated April 28, 1997, by the Central Mine, Planning and Design Institute Limited (CMPDIL). A copy of this letter has been placed by the respondent, M/s. R.K. Coal Sales Pvt. Ltd., in T.T.R. No. 60 of 1999 and is at page 55 of its counter-affida....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oses, SSF is used for domestic purpose." 10.. The Commissioner has just avoided a reference to this letter and has not mentioned any other expert opinion on the point. The Tribunal in its leading order in the case of Pandit Fuel Co. Pvt. Ltd., has referred to some other materials also. It has referred to the opinion of the Coal Controller which is as under: "This office has been considering SSF as an industrial product and hence it has been kept out of the purview of Colliery Control Order both in respect of pricing and distribution. This clarification is being given on the request of some of the manufacturers." The Tribunal has also referred to a write up sent by the CMPDIL to M/s. Pandit Fuel Co. Pvt. Ltd., which has been reproduced by the Tribunal as under: "Special smokeless fuel and coal briquettes: Through both special smokeless fuel and coal briquettes are used as domestic fuel, there are distinct differences between the two in respect of the product and technology. Financial investment and economics of these two plants are also different. Products: Special smokeless fuel (SSF) is produced in the size range of 30-100 mm. and has no regular shape whereas coal briquett....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld that the exclusionary part of annexure II should be construed rather strictly. Therefore, the commodities that are mentioned in annexure II have to be given their ordinary and common sense meaning and cannot be stretched to unreasonable extent so as to bring within their scope things that have no similarity with the commodities mentioned therein. Simply because SSF and coal briquettes are both used as fuel, the two cannot be treated to be the same when the entry in annexure II does not use the general words like "fuel" or "coal". If the intention of the Government was to deny the benefit of exemption under section 4-A to all units manufacturing fuel or coal then the two entries at serial Nos. 11 and 16 should have been different and entry No. 16 could not have been specifically restricted to hard coke when admittedly there are several varieties of coal. As pointed out by the CMPDIL in manufacturing SSF, the pieces of coal that are fed into the process do not loose their shape and coal-tar is obtained as a by-product while coal briquettes are manufactured out of coal dust by using binders like molasses and other things and there is no by-product. The learned Standing Counsel plac....