JUDGMENT M. Katju, J.
1. This Writ petition has been filed for a mandamus directing the respondent Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur not to realize Octroi from the petitioner on the grounds received by the petitioner at Central Goods Shed, Kanpur Railway Station which is transported to the petitioners factory site at Bindki Road, Fatehpur.
2. Heard learned counsellor the parties.
3. The petitioner is a registered company registered under the Indian Companies Act which has its factory at Bindki Road, Fatehpur in which it manufactures steel tubes and pipes. For this manufacture the petitioner uses raw material e.g. steel hot rolled steel coils, Zinc and other materials. The steel is purchased by the petitioner from the Steel Authority of India Ltd. from steel plants at Purgapur, Bokaro and Rourkela. Similarly the petitioner purchases Zinc from the Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation Ltd. Kanpur, Hindustan Zinc Ltd., Ghaziabad and Udaipur.
4. It is alleged in paragraph 7 of the writ petition that the petitioners factory does not have handling facilities of the raw material at Bindki Road Station, Fatehpur for bulk goods. Hence the petitioner has to receive the raw material at Central Goods Shed at Kanpur Railway Station, and after unloading the goods there the petitioner transports the same by trucks to its factory at Bindki Road, Fatehpur. In paragraph 9 of the writ petition it is alleged that the raw materials are neither consumed nor used nor sold within the limits of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur and they are immediately transported from Kanpur to Bindki Road, Fatehpur.
5. Section 172(2)(b) of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam empowers the Nagar Mahapalika to impose octroi on the goods or animals brought within the city for consumption, use or sale. The State Government issued a notification under Section 203(2) of the Adhiniyam imposing octroi from 1-4-1972, Rule 5 of the Rules made under the Adhiniyam provided for the mode of assessing the octroi for the goods imported for consumption, use or sale within the limits of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur. Rule 17 lays down that when the goods are imported into the Nagar Mahapalika Kanpur limits, the Moharrir in charge of the Outpost Barrier shall call upon the importer to declare the goods for consumption, use or sale within the octroi limits or for immediate export. In case of goods imported for consumption, use or sale the Head Moharrir has to assess the octroi. However, if the goods are declared to have been imported for immediate export, the Moharrir shall deal with them in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Transit Pass Rules framed by the State Government. Rule 18 has been quoted in paragraph 16 of the writ petition. The other relevant rules being Rule 28 and 31 are quoted in paragraphs 18 and 19 of the writ petition.
6. In paragraph 22 it is alleged that the petitioner brought to the notice of the Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur that the petitioner receives goods at Kanpur Railway Station for the reason that it does not have handling facilities at Bindki Road, Fatehpur. The petitioner also informed the Nagar Mahapalika that it was not importing the goods within the Nagar Mahapalika octroi limits for consumption, use or sale within those limits. Consequently, an order was passed by the Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur on 3-6-1975 requiring the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2500/-as security money for issuing the transit passes. The petitioner deposited this security money and it was given transit passes. Subsequently, however, the respondents started creating trouble in issuing transit passes and hence the petitioner had to file writ petition No. 742 of 1982 in which an interim order was passed on 12-10-1982 as quoted in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the writ petition which directed the respondents to issue transit passes. This writ petition was disposed of on 17-7-1985 vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition.
7. In paragraph 34 of the writ petition it is stated that again after the four months the respondents started threatening to realize octroi from the petitioner. By an order dated 2-2-1987 the respondents demanded octroi from the petitioner on the goods received at Kanpur Railway Station though they were immediately transported to Bindki Road, Fatehpur vide Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Aggrieved this writ petition has been filed in this Court.
8. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents and we have perused the same. In paragraph 6 of the same it is stated that the payment for goods in question is made by the petitioners head office at Kanpur. Hence it is contended that even if they are transported immediately for consumption or use at Bindki Road, Fatehpur the transaction of sale takes place at Kanpur. In paragraphs 15.16 and 17 of the counter-affidavit it is repeated that the sale takes place at Kanpur.
9. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed and in paragraph 9 it is stated that the goods are never brought within the limit of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur for sale, consumption or use within these limits. Merely because the payment is made through the Bank at Kanpur the goods do not become liable for payment of octroi. The invoices are issued by Steel Authority of India Ltd. Bokaro/ Rourkela/Durgapur and Central sales tax is also charged in the bills by the Steel Authority of India. The petitioner submits the gales tax form-C to the Steel Authority of India against the above invoices. In paragraphs 18 and 19 it is denied that the goods are brought within the limits of Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika for sale. It is alleged that no sale takes place within the limit of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur.
10. In our opinion this petition deserved to be allowed for the reason that the sale or use does not take place within the limits of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur. The railway receipts show that the goods are sent from Bokaro or other places outside U.P. to Kanpur Central Goods Shed in the account of the petitioner. The invoices issued by the Steel Authority of India Ltd. Bokaro have been sent in the name of the petitioner. The goods after being unloaded at Kanpur Railway Station are immediately loaded on trucks and carried to the petitioners factory at Bindki Road, Fatehpur. Thus there is no break in the journey, The facts of the case are covered by the Division Bench decision of this Court in Satna Cement Works v. Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad, 1985 UPTC 269. In our opinion, the goods were not brought for consumption, use or sale into the limits of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur.
11. For the reasons given above, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to refund any amount which they realized as octroi from the petitioner in respect of the goods received by the petitioner at Central Goods Shed Kanpur Railway Station which were transported to the petitioner's factory at Bindki Road at Fatehpur. This refund will be made by the respondent No. 1 along with interestat 12% per annum from the date of payment/deposit of any octroi till the date of refund within two months of production of a certified copy of this order before respondent No. 1.