2024 (2) TMI 70

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act".) means any plant and machinery as also apparatus, tool and appliances used for "manufacture or processing of any goods". He has submitted that even though storage tank is included in the said definition in clause (iii) of Section 2(f) of the Act, however the Cello in question is not a fixed part of the plant and machinery and is an apparatus used for supply of the ink, that is already manufactured, to the customers. Once a customer uses the said ink, the Cello is returned to the factory and is once again attached to the plant that fills the cello again. He has further submitted that one would see that certain goods have been excluded specifically from the definition in Section 2(f) of the Act such as vehicles used for transporting the goods or passengers or both. It is his submission that the Cello is an apparatus used only for transporting and cannot be treated as a part of plant and machinery. 5. Per contra, Sri Atul Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee/respondent has submitted that the Tribunal has come to a particular fact finding that the Cello is an intricate part ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d and accounted for in business but utilised for the purpose of providing facility to the employees. (iv) vehicle used for transporting goods or passengers or both; and (v) capital goods used in the execution of a works contract" 7. The finding of the Tribunal in the instant case is also extracted below:- 8. It is well settled that the Tribunal is the last fact finding body and that this Court in revision would not go into an enquiry with regard to the factual aspects that have been decided by the Tribunal. In exercise of revisional jurisdiction, the High Court has a limited mandate. The scope of revisional jurisdictional, is primarily focused on questions of law, jurisdictional errors, or procedural irregularities. The High Court in a revision petition must refrain from engaging in a de novo inquiry into factual matters already adjudicated upon by the Tribunal, unless compelling grounds warranting such intervention are made. 9. The limited revisional jurisdiction under the Act is confined to only the questions of law, and not the questions of fact. Section 58 of the Act has been extracted below: 58. Revision by High Court in special cases.- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cludes the Commissioner and the State Government." 10. This Court is not allowed in a revision petition to reappreciate and/or re-examine and analyse evidence and findings of the Tribunal. 11. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limtied v. Dilbahar Singh, reported in (2014) 9 SCC 78, expounded on the scope of revisional jurisdiction. Relevant paragraphs have been extracted below: "31. We are in full agreement with the view expressed in Sri Raja Lakshmi Dyeing Works [Sri Raja Lakshmi Dyeing Works v. Rangaswamy Chettiar, (1980) 4 SCC 259] that where both expressions "appeal" and "revision" are employed in a statute, obviously, the expression "revision" is meant to convey the idea of a much narrower jurisdiction than that conveyed by the expression "appeal". The use of two expressions "appeal" and "revision" when used in one statute conferring appellate power and revisional power, we think, is not without purpose and significance. Ordinarily, appellate jurisdiction involves a rehearing while it is not so in the case of revisional jurisdiction when the same statute provides the remedy by way of an "appeal" and so also of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y itself that the decision is "according to law". This is expressly stated in Ram Dass [Ram Dass v. Ishwar Chander, (1988) 3 SCC 131] . Whether or not a finding of fact recorded by the subordinate court/tribunal is according to law, is required to be seen on the touchstone whether such finding of fact is based on some legal evidence or it suffers from any illegality like misreading of the evidence or overlooking and ignoring the material evidence altogether or suffers from perversity or any such illegality or such finding has resulted in gross miscarriage of justice. Ram Dass [Ram Dass v. Ishwar Chander, (1988) 3 SCC 131] does not lay down as a proposition of law that the revisional power of the High Court under the Rent Control Act is as wide as that of the appellate court or the appellate authority or such power is coextensive with that of the appellate authority or that the concluded finding of fact recorded by the original authority or the appellate authority can be interfered with by the High Court by reappreciating evidence because Revisional Court/authority is not in agreement with the finding of fact recorded by the court/authority below. Ram Dass [Ram Dass v. Ishwar Chande....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ाता द्वारा संगत वर्ष में रू0 7522903.00 के खरीदे गये सीलो वे गुड्स है जो प्रिन्टिंग इंक निर्माण प्रकिया का एक अभिन्न अंग है जो एक पार्ट्स के रूप में मशीन में स्वतः फिट हो जाता है और निर्मित हो रही इंक इसमें एकत्र होती है इसके फिल हो जाने पà¤....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....े ले जाने का साधन मानते हुए जो मत आर आई टी सी करने हेतु लिया गया है वह उचित नहीं है क्योंकि वैट अधिनियम के अन्तर्गत जो कैपिटल गुड्स की परिभाषा दी गई है उस में पूजीगत माल का तात्पर्य व्यवहारी द्वारा विक्रय के लिए किसी माल के विनिर्à....