2011 (11) TMI 589 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of terms "relevant industry" in a notification dated May 6, 1986.
2. Deeming acceptance of rectification application under section 37(3) of the RST Act, 1994.

Interpretation of "relevant industry" in the notification dated May 6, 1986:
The case revolved around determining whether the petitioner-assessee was entitled to partial exemption during a specific assessment year based on the comparison of tax liability with the average percentage in the "relevant industry." The petitioner argued that "relevant industry" referred only to other cement industries in Rajasthan manufacturing white cement, while the Revenue contended it included other cement manufacturers as well. The controversy was settled by a Division Bench decision, which clarified that "relevant industry" should be understood based on common trade knowledge. The judgment emphasized that the comparison was essential to determine eligibility for partial exemption under the notification. It was highlighted that the absence of other white cement manufacturers in the relevant year did not entitle the assessee to claim exemption based on other cement industries.

Deeming acceptance of rectification application under section 37(3) of the RST Act, 1994:
The question arose regarding the justification of deeming acceptance of a rectification application by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) under section 37(3) of the RST Act, 1994. The court noted that subsequent developments, including a favorable Division Bench judgment, rendered it unnecessary to delve into this legal issue. The judgment clarified that the Division Bench decision in favor of the assessee covered the current assessment year, binding all lower authorities. Consequently, the revision petition was allowed, affirming the petitioner's entitlement to the notification's benefits. The assessing authority was directed to compute the partial exemption based on white cement manufacturers only, excluding other cement varieties. Any resulting refund due to the petitioner had to be processed by the Revenue within three months in compliance with the law.

In conclusion, the High Court of Rajasthan resolved the issues by interpreting the "relevant industry" term, affirming the petitioner's entitlement to partial exemption, and directing the assessing authority to calculate the exemption accordingly. The judgment emphasized adherence to the Division Bench decision and timely processing of any refunds owed to the petitioner.