Hon'ble Prakash Krishna, J.—The petitioner, a University, established under the provisions of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 with aim and object to impart education in various disciplines of Higher Education and Research and also what its name suggests is imparting education from its campus at Varanasi and affiliated Colleges, has to rush to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-11, Varanasi asking it to produce the account books as information available with him is that the petitioner has sold forms worth Rs. 8,05,400/- but has not paid the VAT tax under the provisions of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. The facts are not much in dispute. Only a legal proposition as to whether the petitioner is a ‘dealer’ within the meaning of Section 2(h) and is carrying on the business within the meaning of Section 2(e), of the Act.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that it is a statutory body constituted under the provisions of U.P. State Universities Act and is imparting education in various courses run by the University. The seats are limited, therefore, with a view to select only meritorious students, it conducts tests. These tests are held for admission to Graduate, Post-graduate and various professional courses. To facilitate the holding of such tests, the University publishes brochure/admission form containing examination schedule and other conditions for admission in various such courses. Irrespective of the courses or as to whether the tests are held for admission in Undergraduate, Graduate, Postgraduate etc., the costs of these forms is Rs. 50/- uniformly to meet out the printing expenses etc. of the admission forms, except for professional courses, cost of which is Rs. 500/-. This non profit making activity the University has to undertake it for its smooth functioning. Printing and selling of forms etc. to admission seekers by the petitioner is at the most incidental activity of the petitioner. Section-7 of the State Universities Act enumerates the powers and duties of University. Governor of the State is Ex-officio Chancellor of the State Universities. The petitioner is a statutory body, its powers and duties are statutorily defined and printing and selling of the admission forms to admission seekers does not find mention in the Statute, as one of its object.

4. The contention of the petitioner in simple terms indeed is that it is imparting education which does not by any stretch of imagination amounts to “business” as it is commonly understood. The imparting of education does not mean dealing, trading or manufacturing ‘goods’. The U.P. VAT Act has been enacted for levy and collection of tax on sale or purchase of goods in the State of Uttar Pradesh and for the matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. Earlier, printing materials were not exigible to VAT Act. Schedule-II of the U.P. VAT Act was amended and Entry No. 100 was added which provides taxability of “printing material, including diary and calendar” vide notification dated 24th of December, 2007. Submission is that action of the respondents calling upon the petitioner to produce account books with regard to the printing and sale of test forms or initiation of proceedings under the said Act, is wholly without jurisdiction and uncalled for. Hence, the present writ petition.

5. The respondents in their counter-affidavit have not controverted the material allegations as contained in the petition with regard to the activity of the petitioner to impart education etc. The defence as set out by the respondents is that the activity of the petitioner printing the admission forms and realizing price for the same brings him into the ambit of term “dealer” as defined under the Act and activities carried by him are business and consideration received by the petitioner is sale price as defined under the Act, vide para 4 of the