Rajan Roy, J. - (1.) Heard Dr. R.K. Shukla, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Shri Rohit Nandan Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) This is a trade tax revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 challenging the judgment dated 23.11.2012 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal Bench-I, Lucknow, the judgment and order dated 19.12011 passed by the First Appellate Authority and the impugned Assessment Order dated 15.01.2010 by which the claim of the petitioner to deductions to the tune of Rs. 94,91,865.36/- under Section 3-F (2)(b)(iii) was disallowed on the ground that on interception of a vehicle carrying the goods of the revisionist finished aluminium windows were seized and the Driver of the vehicle gave a statement that he had loaded finished aluminium windows from the factory and on this premise the conclusion was drawn that the revisionist was a manufacturer of finished aluminium windows and therefore, the deductions were disallowed in connection with the works contract entered by the revisionist with the U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd., Lucknow.
(3.) This revision was admitted on 29.02018 on the following question of law:- "Whether the Tribunal has erred in treating the petitioner as a 'manufacturer' so as to deny the benefit claimed by it under section 3-F(2)(b)(iii) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act 1948 based on the work-contracts dated 1.12.2006 and 25.3.2006?" ;