9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (6) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of tax holiday as per the scheme. The scheme provides for exemption of tax in respect of sales of certain goods by a newly set up small-scale industry on fulfilment of certain conditions specified in the scheme. The said application was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Calcutta (North Circle) on December 8, 1986. Against the said order of rejection a revisional application was filed before the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, who by his order dated May 19, 1987 confirmed the order of rejection made by the Assistant Commissioner. Thereafter a review application was also filed before the said Additional Commissioner, who refused to review his earlier order and rejected the application on January 25, 1989. In the present application this particular order has been assailed. 3.. At the time of hearing the learned counsel for the applicant claimed that the applicant fulfilled all the conditions laid down in rule 3(66a) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 and the findings of the sales tax authorities that it has not fulfilled such conditions are not based on facts and law and as such it is entitled to get the eligibility certificate in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igibility certificate on fulfilment of certain conditions. It is the obligation on the part of the competent authority to consider the grant of eligibility certificate only on the basis of the requirements of law and not otherwise. The taxing authority is to act within the four corners of the statute and no extraneous matter ought to be taken note of. On this point we agree with the view of the Calcutta High Court in Shri Shiv Kumar Bajaj v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1986] 63 STC 354. The question of the form of rentreceipts and subsequent payment in respect of credit sales to a party are extraneous issues, which were not at all relevant in the matter of issue of eligibility certificate. 7.. The main ground for refusal of eligibility certificate was that the applicant did not keep separate accounts in respect of the newly set up small-scale industry and that the dealer intermingled sale of goods manufactured from his own factory and also those manufactured from outside the factory. Cash Memo No. 8 dated February 18, 1986, indicated sale of polypropylene bags for 100 kilograms including 28 kilograms of goods manufactured from his own factory and 72 bags manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s own agent and on payment of labour charges, may be treated as a manufacturer for the purpose of tax as per some other provisions in the State sales tax laws. But the provision in rule 3(66a) is very clear, specific and unambiguous. Only sales of those goods, which are manufactured in the unit itself, are entitled to tax exemption and not others. It is, therefore, obvious that the cash memo dated February 18, 1986, did not exclusively relate to goods manufactured in the small-scale industry, and separate accounts of such sales were not kept as required in the rule up to that date. 9.. The learned counsel for the applicant contented that there may be dispute with regard to this particular cash memo or up to that date but after February 18, 1986, all the cash memos relate only to goods manufactured in the concerned unit. He further contended that he should be entitled to the eligibility certificate as subsequently he had fulfilled all the conditions for the issue of the eligibility certificate. He, therefore, argued that instead of issuing the eligibility certificate with effect from the date of first sale of manufactured goods, namely, February 5, 1986 it should have been issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irmities and compliance with the requirements of law was ensured. 14. This view is in conformity with the construction of sub-clause (i) read with sub-clause (ii) of rule 3(66a) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941. This is also supported by the decision in Daga Metal Industries v. Commercial Tax Officer [1988] 70 STC 248 (Cal) "that the well-known rule of construction is that in case of doubt a fiscal statute is to be construed in favour of the tax-payer". We have also been governed by the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Chandulal Harjiwandas v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1967] 63 ITR 627 that a provision for exemption or relief should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the Legislature and not to defeat it. 15.. It may, however, be mentioned in this connection that the period of tax exemption is to be computed from the date of the first sale and cannot be extended beyond three or five years, as the case may be, from that date. In the circumstances of the case the applicant is eligible to get eligibility certificate for the period February 19, 1986 to February 4, 1987. For the remaining period of four years he will have to make application to the appro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
