9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. -------------------------------------------------- ORDER The order of the Court was delivered by K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.- The matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission after hearing both sides. The petitioners in these appeals have filed the special leave petition against the order of the Allahabad High Court. The petitioners belong to a re-established small-scale industrial unit for manufacturing cycle stands and carriers during the year 1984-85. They applied for power connection in December, 1984, but it was sanctioned on 19th January, 1986. Meanwhile the petitioners, however, started production manually with effect from 1st March, 1985. They effected their first sale of the manufactured goods on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e., 20th May, 1986, should be taken as the date of starting production was rejected. The High Court also observed that the date of first sale, namely 30th March, 1985, should be taken as the date of commencement of the period of exemption. Having thus found, the High Court, however, was not prepared to accept the petitioners' plea that the capital investment in the unit was more than Rs. 3,00,000 during the period between 1st March, 1985, i.e., the date of starting production, and 30th March, 1985, i.e., the date of first sale. In the result, it was declared that the petitioners were entitled for exemption only for a period of three years from the date of first sale, namely 30th March, 1985, in view of section 4-A of the Act and the rele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date of first sale. This aspect is not in dispute. Then the question is whether the exemption should be for three years or five years? It depends upon the question as to what was the total capital investment on 30th March, 1985; was it less than Rs. 3,00,000 or more. Column 3 of the Table appended to the Notification dated 29th January, 1985, issued under section 4-A of the Act shows that in respect of the units mentioned therein in serial No. 3, the exemption should be for three years if the total capital investment does not exceed Rs. 3,00,000 and if it exceeds Rs. 3,00,000 it should be five years. The petitioners' case throughout has been that they purchased and installed a diesel unit on 4th March, 1985, amounting to Rs. 72,800 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the High Court and, therefore, the petitioners cannot raise the same before this Court. The High Court has given a categorical finding as under: "In the circumstances of the present case, we find that the date of starting production in the petitioners' unit is 1st March, 1985 and in view of sub-section (1) of section 4-A, the date of the first sale, i.e., 30th March, 1985, should be taken as the date of commencement of the period of exemption, the same falling within six months of the date of starting production. " (Emphasis Here italicised. supplied). Therefore, 30th March, 1985, should be the date of commencement of the period of exemption. In the review petition filed before the Joint Director of Industries, no doubt, it is clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption that the exemption period should be counted from the date of production and the total investment as on that day alone is relevant which is erroneous. From the above material it cannot be said that this aspect was not an issue before the High Court but the same lost its significance in view of the larger claim made by the petitioners that the exemption should be from 20th May, 1986. The learned counsel for the State, however, submits that the matter may be remanded. We do not think it is necessary to do so in view of the cogent and clear material, which cannot be controverted. Before proceeding we may extract the order which was impugned before the High Court: "Letter No. 8971 DS/8/Sales Tax/88-89 Office Joint Director Industries ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate Government along with their counter-affidavit have annexed the bill dated 4th March, 1985, which shows that the diesel set was purchased by the petitioners for total cost of Rs. 72,800. If we take into the account the above admission made in the counter-affidavit by the State Government and the contents of this bill it cannot be in dispute-that the diesel set was purchased by the petitioners on 4th March, 1985. Now, in view of the categorical finding of the High Court that the date of commencement of production was 1st March, 1985 and the date of first sale was 30th March, 1985, the date of purchase of diesel set which is 4th March, 1985, was clearly prior to the date of first sale, and therefore the cost of the diesel set should also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
