TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 1012
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee under section 58 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bench I, Agra, dated September 14, 2010 for the assessment year 2005-06. The questions of law sought to be answered are hereunder: "(1) Whether in view of the Notification No. 1307 dated April 28, 2005 since full rebate was allowed by the assessing authority in the assessment order dated October 6, 2007 of trade tax on account of entry tax having been paid at the full rate of five per cent, hence no State development tax can be legally levied in view of clause (iii) of Notification No. 1307 dated April 28, 2005? (2) Whether the assessing authority in the assessment order dated October 6, 2007 having allowed the trade tax rebate to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t liable for payment of any State development tax hence the view of the Tribunal is erroneous in law?" The facts of the case are that the assessee is a manufacturer and a seller of kraft paper. For the assessment year 2005-06 an order of assessment was passed by the assessing authority by which he accepted the account books of the assessee as well as the disclosed turnover. The kraft paper, which is manufactured by the assessee is notified to be taxable at the rate of five per cent, under section 3A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The relevant notification is Notification No. 730 dated March 7, 2005 issued under section 3A(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. Another notification was issued under section 4(1) of the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 4B; (ii) on which general rate of trade tax under section 3A or section 3D is two per cent or below two per cent; (iii) on which trade tax rebate is allowed to the full extent; (iv) on which exemptions are granted under section 4C." This claim of the assessee that it is not liable to pay the State development tax in view of section 3H(4)(d) of the notification dated April 28, 2005 issued under it has been rejected by the Tribunal as well as the lower authorities. I have heard learned counsels on both sides and also perused the order of the Tribunal. The only ground taken by the Tribunal for rejecting the revisionist's claim is because of four conditions in the notification dated April 28, 2005 have not been satisfied. ....