JUDGMENT PRAKASH KRISHNA, J. - These three revisions are directed against a common order dated July 28, 2000 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Muzaffarnagar in second appeal Nos. 348 of 2000, 157 of 1999 and 270 of 2000. These revisions relate to the assessment year 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. The dealer - opposite party is a rice miller and carries on the business of manufacture and sale of rice. The acceptance of the account books is not in question. In the memo of revision the following questions of law have been sought to be raised : (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to set aside the tax imposed on the sale of paddy husk and the packing material without any proper and legal basis ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade tax Tribunal has properly utilized the material available on record ? So far as the controversy involved with regard to the paddy husk is concerned the same stands concluded by the judgment of his court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Straw and Agro Product Limited, Moradabad [2004] UPTC 1125 wherein it has been held that paddy husk is not taxable being cattle fodder. Respectfully following the said decision, there is no error in the order of the Tribunal. So far as the packing material is concerned, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the packing material was purchased within the State of U.P. and was sold along with the sale of rice. The value of the packing material was not charged separately from the purchasers. Since the dealer - opposite party has not realised the price of packing material from the customers in view of section 3AB of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 the order of the Tribunal holding that no tax is payable on packing material is perfectly justified. The revisions lacks merit. In the result, all the revisions are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.