9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax defaulter. 2.. The respondents have filed counter-affidavit. The petitioner has filed rejoinder in reply thereto. We have heard Mr. Binod Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, learned S.C.I., for the respondents. 3.. Under the Industrial Policy, 1995, an entrepreneur, who has established a new industrial unit, can claim exemption from payment of tax under the Act. The new unit has been defined in the policy as a unit in which production starts between September 1, 1995, and August 31, 2000. The policy has further laid down that an existing unit after change of its ownership or on change of its name cannot be called a new unit. 4.. The petitioner, in its writ application, has stated that it has pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Fuel was registered under the Dhanbad Circle for manufacture of the Coal Briquettes since February, 1989, and continued its unit till its transfer to the petitioner. It has further been mentioned that although the petitioner s unit is registered for manufacture of hard coke and the unit in the name of M/s. S.K. Fuel was registered for manufacture of coal briquettes but it is one and the same unit. In this connection, paragraph Nos. 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the counter-affidavit are reproduced below: "12. That it is stated that the petitioner-unit has obtained the registration for manufacturing the hard coke and its predecessor one of M/s. S.K. Fuel was manufacturing the coal briquettes. It is relevant to mention herein that the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fect that the counter-affidavit "contains misleading and irrelevant facts based upon extraneous consideration beyond the documents available on record" have been made. In paragraph No. 3, it has been stated that annexure 9 impliedly shows that the petitioner's unit is a new unit. Paragraph 5 contains a reference to the certificate issued by the District Industries Centre for the petitioner's unit. In paragraph No. 6, only this much has been stated that the aim and object of the notification (industrial policy) have been frustrated by the impugned order on the extraneous ground. The only paragraph which can be said to be relevant paragraph is the paragraph No. 4 of the reply to the counter-affidavit which is reproduced below: "4. That admi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s tried to make a distinction between the unit of M/s. S.K. Fuels and the unit for which it has claimed exemption. According to it, when the unit was with M/s. S.K. Fuels, it was registered for manufacturing briquettes for which chimney was not required whereas the petitioner's unit is meant to manufacture hard coke for which chimney is essential. It has also been stated that the petitioner has purchased a number of other items/equipments from different sources but those items/equipments have not been disclosed. 7.. The specific allegations made in various paragraphs of the counteraffidavit reproduced hereinbefore have not, at all, been denied by the petitioner with the result that the same are liable to be taken as correct. Paragraph 4 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
