- (1.) HEARD learned Counsels for the parties.
(2.) BY means of present petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated July 17, 2001 passed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow, whereby the installed production capacity of the petitioner's unit has been fixed at 30,000 M.T. of vanaspati ghee per year while disposing of the application filed by the petitioner for composition of tax under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act").
(3.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. It had entered into an agreement for financial assistance, before establishing manufacturing plant of vanaspati ghee with Industrial Finance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as I.F.C.I.) on March 27, 1992. The petitioner's unit was a "new industrial unit" within the meaning of Section 4A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act under the notification dated July 27, 1991, the exemption was granted from payment of trade tax up to December 1, 1999 to the new industrial units. The dispute in the present writ petition is confined to the period of four months commencing December 1, 1999 to March 31, 2000. For the aforestated period, the petitioner filed requisite application under Section 7D of the Act stating that the installed production capacity of the petitioner's manufacturing unit is 62.50 M.T. per day and therefore, its actual installed production capacity is 18,750 M.T. per annum. Along with the said composition application number of documents in support of the installed production capacity were filed. The Commissioner of Trade Tax by the impugned order has found that the installed production capacity of the petitioner's unit is 30,000 M.T. per annum instead of 18,750 M.T. per annum and it determined the composition amount accordingly payable by the petitioner, by the impugned order. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed principally on the ground that the impugned order has been passed without taking into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner, its contents and the documents. A counter -affidavit has been filed stating that a composition scheme is an agreement between the dealer and the State Government, by which an agreed amount is fixed in lieu of tax. The said scheme is optional. The petitioner along with application under Section 4A had annexed certain documents, which clearly discloses that the annual installed production capacity of the petitioner's unit is 30,000 M.T. per annum. It has been further stated that according to own showing of the petitioner the installed production capacity of the petitioner's unit is 30,000 M.T. per annum. The reference made by the petitioner to certificate issued by the chartered engineers, certifying that the installed production capacity is 62.50 M.T. per day is not acceptable in view of the other available documents on the record.;