VIKRAM NATH, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri K.M. Sahai, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the applicant and Sri N.R. Kumar, learned Counsel for the dealer.
(2.) THE dispute relates to the assessment year 1994 -95. The following questions of law have been sought to be raised by means of this revision: (a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to allow the exemption on the sale made by the appellant through air force canteen in view of the Notification No. 978 dated March 31, 1994 which contemplates the provisions of the exemption only to sale against the authority of law issued by the U.P. States Employees Welfare Corporation to State Government employees and ex -employees? (b) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal has correctly allowed the exemption on the sale made through air force canteen in view of the Notification No. 978 dated March 31, 1994? The dealer is involved in the business of sale and purchase of scooter, scooter parts and accessories, etc. It had also made certain sale to the U.P. State Employees Welfare Corporation and for such sale it had claimed exemption from trade tax. The assessing officer by order dated July 25, 1996 allowed the exemption of trade tax only against sale made through the Corporation to the State Government employees. It further disallowed the exemption with regard to the sale made through the air force canteen and accordingly imposed the tax.
(3.) THE dealer preferred appeal, which was allowed by the Deputy s Commissioner (Appeal) vide order dated December 5, 1996 on the ground that it was past practice that exemption was granted to sale made through the air force canteen. Against the same, department preferred the second appeal which has been dismissed by the Tribunal by order dated April 6, 2002 again on the same reasons as it has been a practice in the past the payment of tax on sale made through the canteen was not warranted.;