Revision vs M/S Cello Industries
2024 Latest Caselaw 340 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Revision vs M/S Cello Industries on 13 March, 2024

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
               AT NAINITAL
            HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. RITU BAHRI
                              AND
              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL
                           13th MARCH, 2024

  COMMERICAL/TRADE TAX REVISION No.53 of
                      2022
Commissioner, State/Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand,
Dehradun
                                     ...Revision
                     Versus
M/s Cello Industries, Haridwar
                                                             ...Respondent

Counsel for the revisionist/State.   :   Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder.

Counsel for respondent               :   Mr. S.K. Posti, learned senior advocate
                                         assisted by Mr. Ashutosh Posti, learned
                                         counsel.



JUDGMENT :

(per Ms. Ritu Bahri, C.J.)

After hearing the learned counsels for the parties at length, there is no substantial question of law involved in the present revision filed by the Revenue. A perusal of the order dated 28.11.2020, of First Appellate/Joint Commissioner (Appeal) State Tax, Dehradun, shows that as per the Notification dated 05.10.2006, issued by the Ministry of Small Industry, New Delhi, there was a provision made that some items will be deducted in the calculation of investment made in the plant and machinery. As per this Notification, the details of the items in this order are as under:-

"i. Equipment such as tools, jigs, dies, moulds and spare parts for maintenance and the cost of consumable.

ii. Installation of plant and machinery.

iii. Research and development equipment and pollution control equipment.

iv. Power generation set and extra transformer installed by the enterprise as per the regulations of State electricity board.

V. Ban charges and service charges paid to the National Small Industries Corporation or the State Small Industries Corporation.

vi. Procurement or installation of cables, wiring, bus bars, electrical control panels (not mounted on individual machines) oil circuit breakers or miniature circuit breakers which are necessarily to be used for providing electrical power to the plant and machinery or for safety measures.

vii. Gas producer plants.

viii. Transportation charges (excluding sales tax or value added tax and excise duty) for indigenous machinery from the place of their manufacture to the site of the enterprise.

ix. Charges paid for the technical know how for erection of plant and machinery.

x. Such storage tanks which store raw materials and finished products only and are not linked with the manufacturing process and"

2. After perusing this notification, the investment

made by the respondent with respect to moulds and

dies, which came to Rs.22,67,82,599/- was to be

deleted from the cost of the plant and machinery, and

the investment made by the respondent was held to be

Rs.5,73,72,994/-, and reference was made to the

scheme initiated by the Government of Uttarakhand on

28.02.2014, for encouragement of the small

manufacturing units situated in the State, and thereafter

the Directorate of Industries Uttarakhand has issued a

certificate on 28.02.2014 to M/s Cello Industries, in

which it was clarified that they have made an

investment of Rs.5,73,72,994/- in the plant and

machinery till 23.10.2009, and for this investment the

cost of moulds and dies was not included, and in this

backdrop the appeal was allowed and the tax levied by

the Assessing Authority @ 2% on the central sale of

Rs.1,34,09,32,644/- in place of it, tax was being levied

@ 1%.

3. Even in the second appeal, this order has been

affirmed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Uttarakhand

Dehradun vide order dated 02.11.2021, and in

paragraph 12 of this order, page 65 of the paper-book,

in detail, it has been held that the amount spent in

moulds and dies has to be reduced from the total

investment till 30.03.2016, the investment came to

Rs.22,67,82,599/-, and further as per balance sheet of

the dealer there was a depreciation in plant and

machinery and in moulds and dies till 30.06.2016, and

net investment till 30.06.2016 came to

Rs.22,67,82,599/-, which was less than Rupees Twenty

Five Crores.

4. Hence, as per the Notification dated

05.10.2006, the benefit of reducing the cost of moulds

and dies has been extended to the revisionist for the

purposes of calculating the total investment. No

substantial question of law arises in this revision. The

same is dismissed.

______________ RITU BAHRI, C.J.

__________________ RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Dt: 13th March, 2024 NR/