2006 (8) TMI 309 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Clause 28.1 of the Commercial Tax Reforms? Held that - Appeal dismissed. Since the appellant was availing the facility of Taxdeferment on 15.11.2000 he was not entitled to the benefit under Clause 28.1. Hence we agree with the view taken by the High Court.

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001 regarding set-off of Sales Tax benefit.
- Applicability of Clause 28.1 of the Industrial Policy.
- Entitlement of the appellant to benefit under Clause 28.1.
- Literal interpretation of the provisions in the Industrial Policy.

Interpretation of Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001 regarding set-off of Sales Tax benefit:
The case involved a dispute regarding the entitlement of a petitioner to avail the benefit of set-off of Sales Tax under the Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001. The petitioner-appellant sought a declaration to avail the benefit of set-off of Sales Tax w.e.f. 1.1.2004 in accordance with the said policy. The Court examined the relevant facts, laws, and circulars/guidelines issued by the respondents to determine the issue.

Applicability of Clause 28.1 of the Industrial Policy:
The Industrial Policy defined new and existing industrial units and mentioned Commercial Tax Reforms in Clause 28.1, which allowed set-off of Jharkhand Sales Tax paid on purchases of raw materials against Sales Tax payable on the sale of finished products. The key question was whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Clause 28.1. The Court noted that the appellant had been granted Sales Tax-deferment under the Old Bihar Industrial Policy until 31.12.2003.

Entitlement of the appellant to benefit under Clause 28.1:
The Court observed that since the appellant was availing the facility of Tax-deferment on 15.11.2000, they were not entitled to the benefit under Clause 28.1 of the Industrial Policy. The appellant's argument that most units were enjoying Sales Tax-deferment on the effective date was rejected, emphasizing the clear language of the provision. The Court applied the literal rule of interpretation and held that the benefit under Clause 28.1 was only available if Tax-deferment was not being availed of on the date of the Industrial Policy's notification.

Literal interpretation of the provisions in the Industrial Policy:
In line with the literal rule of interpretation, the Court cited precedents to emphasize the importance of the plain and grammatical meaning of statutory provisions. The Court highlighted that the legislative intent must be clear for other rules of construction to be applied. As the appellant was availing Tax-deferment on the specified date, they were not entitled to the benefit under Clause 28.1. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal in agreement with the High Court's decision.