YASHWANT VARMA,J. - (1.) Heard Shri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Suyash Agarwal for the revisionist and Shri A.C. Tripathi, learned standing counsel who appears for the respondents.
(2.) This revision calls in question an order of the Tribunal dated 13 February 2007 upholding the decision of the authorities denying the assessee the benefits of an exemption notification dated 27 February 1997.
(3.) The assessee is stated to be engaged in the manufacture of stationery material including exercise books and registers from handmade paper. The assessee was also found eligible for the grant of credit facilities by the U.P. Khadi Gram Udyog Board ["Board"]. Its case was that it was purchasing handmade paper from the Board and using the same for the purposes of manufacturing exercise books and registers. It also admittedly imported mill made paper during the assessment year in question for the purposes of manufacturing stationery articles and there was on record a clear bifurcation between the quantity of material in the shape of mill made paper which was imported as well as handmade paper which was utilized by the assessee and procured from the Board. The authorities below proceeded to deny the assessee the benefit of the exemption notification holding that admittedly it had in the assessment year also imported mill made paper. This in the considered view of the Court was clearly unsustainable since admittedly there existed on record material clearly establishing and evidencing a bifurcation of turnover of stationary items manufactured from mill made paper and handmade paper. This line of reasoning has also not been accepted by the Tribunal.;