S. B. SINHA, J.

( 1 ) 1. Leave granted.

( 2 ) INTERPRETATION and/or application of an exemption notification dated 27. 7. 1991 is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 10. 7. 2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Trade Tax Revision No. 141 of 1999.

( 3 ) THE admitted fact of the matter is as under: appellant is a private limited company registered under the Indian companies Act. It started a new unit on plot Nos. C-28 and C-29, Industrial area. The Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC) on or about 14. 3. 1991 and 11. 7. 1991 allotted plot No. C-28 and c-29, Industrial Area, Orai in the district of Jalaun in favour of respondent. An agreement for lease was executed in its favour on 18. 9. 1992 by the upsidc for setting up a unit for manufacture of fire bricks and B. P. sets. Appellant commenced production in the said unit on and from 15. 9. 1992. It was registered as a small scale unit with effect from 29. 9. 1992. The first sale of the finished product was made on 24. 10. 1992. It filed an application claiming exemption from payment of trade tax on the turn over of manufactured products in Form 46 before the Sales Tax authorities on 12. 3. 1993 said to be within the stipulated period of six months from the date of first sale. The Sales Tax Authorities, however, asked for a copy of the deed of lease. The application was also returned to the appellant by the said authority on 4. 6. 1993 purportedly for the purpose of removing to remove the said objection. A copy of the deed of lease was furnished to him only on or about 16. 4. 1994.

( 4 ) THE fact that the appellant is entitled to exemption from payment of trade tax is not in dispute. However, whereas according to the appellant it was entitled to such exemption for a period of 10 years from 24. 10. 1992 to 23. 10. 2002, the respondents contend that having regard to the fact that a copy of the deed of lease was furnished to him only in 1994, it was entitled to exemption for the period 16. 4. 1994 to 23. 10. 2002.

( 5 ) AGGRIEVED by an order dated 21. 8. 1995 of the Additional Director, industries, Jhansi Division granting an eligibility certificate in favour of the appellant only in respect of the period from 16. 4. 1994 to 23. 10. 2002, a review application was filed thereagainst, which was rejected by an order dated 27. 7. 1996. Appellant preferred two separate appeals against the aforementioned orders dated 21. 8. 1995 and 27. 7. 1996 before the Uttar pradesh Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow which were marked as Appeal No. 93 of 1996 and 81 of 1996 respectively. The said appeals were dismissed by the Tribunal by an order dated 19. 2. 1999.

( 6 ) THE High Court by reason of the impugned judgment has dismissed the revision application filed by the appellant herein.

( 7 ) APPELLANT is, thus, before us.

( 8 ) MR. Kavin Gulati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, would submit that the High Court as also the Tribunal committed a serious error in so far as they failed to construe the provisions of the UP trade Tax Act and the Rules framed thereunder as also the form in which the application for exemption is required to be filed in their proper perspective as in terms thereof there was no necessity to supply a copy of the deed of lease, as, admittedly, the land in question has been allotted in favour of the appellant by the PUSIDC, a Corporation of the State of Uttar pradesh. Alternatively, it was submitted that as the deed of lease was lying with UP State Industrial Development Corporation which is a Financial corporation owned by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, the appellant could not file the same within the stipulated period and, thus, the authorities must be held to have acted arbitrarily in reducing the period of exemption from ten years to eight years.

( 9 ) MR. Sunil Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, would contend that from a b