- (1.) These two revisions have been filed by the revisionist-assessee against the common order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Meerut dated 13.10.2010 passed in Second Appeal No. 1 of 2009 for A.Y. 2004-05 (U.P.) and Second Appeal No.2 of 2009 for A.Y. 04-05 (Central) filed by the assessee and Second Appeal No. 61 of 2009 for A.Y. 2004-05 (U.P.) and Second Appeal No.62 of 2009 for A.Y. 2004-05 (Central) filed by the revenue. By that order, the Tribunal has partly allowed all the appeals. With respect to rate of tax on spent malt, the Tribunal has treated the same to be unclassified goods and subjected them at a highest rate after reversing the finding of the first appeal authority in that regard who assessed tax @ 5 % treating them to be old un-serviceable machinery etc. In so far as, rejection of books of account is concerned, the Tribunal has set aside the order passed by the assessing authority and remanded the matter to the assessing authority.
(2.) Heard Sri Puneet Agrawal and Sri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist-assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned standing counsel for the respondent-revenue.
(3.) Present revision has been pressed on following questions of law: "C. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that spent malt is not cattle fodder and therefore not exempt from trade tax under Notification KA.NI.-3129/XI-9(40)/92 U.P. Act 15/48-Order-(38)2000, dated 30.9.2000 w.e.f. 1.10.2000 i.e. "Cattle Fodder including green fodder, chuni, bhusi, chhilka, chokar, javi, gowar, de-oiled cake, de-oiled rice polish, de-oiled rice bran or de-oiled rice husk and de-oiled paddy husk (or outer covering of paddy) but excluding oil cake, rice polish, rice bran, rice husk or balanced poultry feed, cattle feed or fish feed?" D. Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the issue of books rejection and ordering for reexamination of figures furnished by the petitioner and passing assessment order afresh, when it had made a categorical finding that there is no material with the department to disapprove the figures furnished by the petitioner?";