ARUN TANDON, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Standing Counsel for the revisionist -department and Sri R.R. Agarwal and Sri Suyash Agarwal learned Counsel for the opposite party -assessee.
(2.) IN respect of the assessment year 1993 -94 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, an assessment order under rule 41(8) of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948 was passed by the assessing officer on March 14, 1997. In the order, the claim of the assessee for exclusion of the turnover qua the footwear traded by the assessee was refused on the ground that under the certificate issued by the Khadi Gramodyog Commission, Bombay, trade in footwear manufactured by a small -scale industry or a khadi gramodyog industry alone was exempted. Since the petitioner had purchased the footwear from manufacturers, other than small -scale/khadi gramodyog industry, he was not entitled for exclusion of the turnover qua the footwear traded by him only on the ground that the assessee was registered with Khadi Gramodyog Commission at Bombay. This part of the order of the assessing authority was subjected to challenge by the assessee by way of appeal before the first appellate authority being Appeal No. 1448 of 1997. The appeal was allowed by the Deputy Commissioner vide order dated March 10, 1998 and the turnover pertaining to the trade in footwear by the assessee was exempted on the ground that footwear is covered within the commodities to be manufactured in a khadi industry or a gramodyog industry.
(3.) AGAINST the first appellate order, the department filed second appeal before the Commissioner, which was numbered as Second Appeal No. 97 of 1998. The appeal has also been dismissed, by means of the order dated February 19, 2004. Hence, the present trade tax revision by the department.;