YASHWANT VARMA,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) This revision seeks to question an order of the Tribunal date 5 April 2007 which has affirmed decisions taken by the assessing authority as well as the First Appellate Authority granting partial relief to the assessee consequent to him having participated and enlisted in a compounding scheme in the relevant assessment year.
(3.) The revisionist is a brick kiln operator who had applied and enlisted under a compounding scheme for brick manufacturers promulgated for the Season Year 2000-01. The assessing authority has restricted its claim for benefits under the composition scheme to the extent of 471 MT coal which was imported into the State during the Assessment Year in question. For the balance turnover regular assessment for payment of tax has been undertaken. This view taken by the assessing authority was found unexceptionable by the First Appellate Authority and has also been affirmed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal in its order has referred to a Circular dated 3 April 1993 in terms of which it has come to hold that a brick manufacturer participating in a composition scheme could not have imported more than 471 MT coal in the relevant Assessment Year.;