TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (4) TMI 646
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing rise to the present trade tax revision are that the assessee is a society registered with U.P. Khadi Gramodyog Board and is engaged in the business of sale of spices after grinding the whole spices. For the assessment year 1997-98, the total turnover as disclosed from the sale effected by the assessee was Rs. 74,16,997.25. According to the assessee, the said turnover in respect of two categories of goods sold by the assessee. The first category of goods was manufactured after purchasing the whole spices (ungrinded spices), i.e., Khada mashala after payment of tax from dealers situate within the State of Uttar Pradesh. Such sales are not liable to any tax under the State of Uttar Pradesh in view of section 3 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 of 2000. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Trade Tax, Saharanpur, vide order dated September 21, 2000 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The first appellate authority segregated the sales effected in respect of two columns of goods manufactured and recorded that the turnover of the goods manufactured from the raw materials purchased from dealer outside the State of Uttar Pradesh would work out Rs. 48,50,720 only and therefore, having regard to the exemption as granted under notification dated February 27, 1997 total turnover of the assessee was less than Rs. 50,00,000. He, therefore, held that the assessee was exempted from payment of tax. This order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged by the department by means ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e demand are possible, the court may adopt an interpretation, which is in favour of assessee in view of the judgment of the honourable Supreme Court of India in the case of Diwan Brothers v. Central Bank of India, Bombay reported in AIR 1976 SC 1503 as well as in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-1 v. Jalgaon Electric Supply Co. Ltd., Bombay reported in [1960] 40 ITR 184; AIR 1960 SC 1182. He therefore, submits that the Tribunal has erred in upsetting the findings recorded by the first appellate authority. The order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contends that the interpretation placed upon the language of clause 3, item No. 3 of the notification dated February 27, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sanstheyn un sharton meyn sey, Jinkey adhin chhot anumaya hai, kishi ka durupayog karen. (3) Kisi kar nirdharan varsh meyn keval pachash lakh rupaya vikraydhan (turnover) tak chhoot uplabdh hogi. From clause 3 of item No. 3 of the aforesaid notification it is apparently clear that it speaks of entire turnover of the assessee registered with U.P. Khadi Gramodyog Board. The clause makes no difference vis-a-vis the taxable turnover and the turnover on which no tax is payable by the assessee. Since language of the clause on a simple reading leads to only one conclusion, this court record that the entire turnover has to be considered in respect of fact that part of this turnover the assessee is exempted from payment of tax under ....