ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) This revision is by the revenue challenging an order passed by Tribunal dated 11th August, 2016, whereby explanation submitted by the assessee has been accepted and the order passed by the Assessing Authority is sustained.
(2.) Perusal of the record goes to show that the assessee for the period January, 2008 to March, 2008 i.e. assessment year 2007-08, disclosed its total sale of Rs. 2,51,45,190/-, which consisted primarily of local sale to the extent of Rs. 2,44,91,865/- and of Central Sales for the remaining amount of Rs. 6,53,325/-. An order, accordingly, was passed by the Assessing Authority accepting such disclosure. This order, however, was modified by the Joint Commissioner. The revising authority found that the sales made by the assessee are apart from steel i.e. ferromanganese and ferro-chrome, and sales have been made to unregistered dealers. Since these are not consumable goods, as such, the assessment order was set aside and the matter was remitted for passing a fresh order, in light of the observations made by the Revisional Authority. The assessee preferred a second appeal against such order, which has been allowed. The explanation submitted by the assessee that the VAT was introduced in 2008, and many of the purchasers were not registered, as such, the goods were sold to the registered dealers by the tax invoice and to the unregistered dealers, by the sale invoice, has been accepted. It has also been found that the assessee was essentially dealing in scrap, and ferromanganese and ferro-chrome are nothing else but scrap.
(3.) Sri Piyush Agarwal for the assessee, supports the order of the Tribunal.;