9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (11) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ). The first sale of the product to the company took place on January 18, 1996. As a dealer registered under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short, the 1994 Act ), the applicant applied on February 14, 1996 for grant of eligibility certificate (in short, EC ) under section 39 of the Act read with rule 99 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 (in short, the 1995 Rules ) to avail of the tax holiday on the sales of the goods (red tooth powder) manufactured at its aforesaid newly set up small-scale industrial unit. The applicantfirm claims that during the hearing of the said application, the competent authority s notice was drawn to the fact that by notification dated July 12, 1996, amending rule 99 of the 1995 Rules, the eligible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 39 of the 1994 Act. In the meantime, the applicant also started production of hair oil in terms of a contract with the said company and necessary entry in the EC was made on May 12, 1997 to extend the tax holiday also on the sales of such hair oil. According to the applicant both the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 misconstrued the legal provision in granting the EC only for five years and failed to appreciate that during the pendency of the application for EC rule 99 was amended, extending the eligible period from five years to seven years. The applicant has, therefore, filed the instant application before this Tribunal for quashing the impugned orders of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and for direction on the respondent No. 1 to issue EC v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y even if his prayer under section 39 is disposed of on the same date on which the applicant s application under section 39 was disposed of, i.e., on September 2, 1996. According to Mr. Chakraborty, two dealers dealing in identical goods would thus be clearly discriminated. He further adds that as a result of such discrimination the applicant will not be able to sell its goods in the market because the other dealer enjoying tax holiday for additional period of two years will be in a position to sell its product at a rate much lower than that of the applicant. In the opinion of Mr. Chakraborty, such discrimination will cause ouster of the applicant from the market. 5.. Having considered the factual and the legal aspects of the matter, we a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntion rests on the legal position that the nature of right conferable on a person under a statute depends on the relevant provisions of the statute as it exists on the date when the person acquires the right. In the case before us, the applicant became eligible to tax holiday under section 39 of the 1994 Act on the date on which the first sale of the product of his newly established small-scale industrial unit took place, i.e., on January 18, 1996. The law as it existed on the date provided for 5 years tax holiday from the date of such first sale, because the unit is situated outside the CMDA area. New rule 99 replaced the old one with effect from July 15, 1996. The new rule permits 7 years tax holiday from the date of the first sale of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, a period of four years from the end of the period for which return was submitted was available under section 11(2a) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 for completion of the assessment. Hence, in that case assessment could be made on or before March 31, 1991. But on June 1, 1987, i.e., before the expiry of four years on March 31, 1991, section 11(2a) was amended making the assessment permissible up to June 30, 1991 and the assessment was actually made on May 10, 1991. In appeal the assessment was affirmed. But the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Appellate and Revisional Board in exercising revisional jurisdiction struck down the assessment on the ground that the assessment having been made beyond the period of limitation of four yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, by the expiry of the last date of period of limitation the obligation of such other person does not become obliterated; only access to the legal process to enforce the demand for discharge of the obligation ceases. That is why if the other person even after the period of limitation admits his obligation in writing, a fresh time period as available under the law of limitation is made available to initiate the legal process to enforce the right, or if the person having the legal obligation discharges the obligation in full or in part the other party can validly accept the same in settlement of the part or whole of the claim under the right as the case may be. Therefore, if by any amendment the period of limitation is extended before a per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
