- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist assessee Sri Shubham Agrawal and Sri Nimai Das learned standing counsel for the State.
(2.) This revision has been filed by the assessee against an order of the Tribunal dated January 16, 2009 for the assessment year 1991-92.
(3.) The questions of law referred to are as under: (i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in denying the benefit of deduction under Section 3F(2)(b)(i) of the U. P. Trade Tax Act to the applicant, by not treating the transaction to be an inter-State sale only because the Central sales tax has not been paid ? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in treating the inter-State sale of bitumen and rori to be taxable under the U. P. Trade Tax Act by overlooking the certificate dated October 23, 1996 given by the project manager NOIDA which conclusively proves that the movement of goods from Delhi to NOIDA was in pursuance of prior contract of sale, and the goods have already been appropriated before the movement ? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in denying the benefit of deduction under Section 3F(2)(b)(i) of the U. P. Trade Tax Act which is in the teeth of law declared by this honourable court in the case of M/s. Santosh and company and M/s. IRCON Ltd. ? (iv) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law, in misconstruing the judgment of PNC construction and treating the deemed sale of bitumen and rori to be the sale of hot mix material and treating it to be unclassified item ?;