9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and give consequential benefits to the petitioner. 2.. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the manufacturing and sale of solvent extracted oil, such as rice bran oil and de-oiled rice bran cakes. It is registered as dealer under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (for short, "the Act"). After commencement of production in its unit situated in Village Takhana, Block Nilokheri, District Karnal, the petitioner applied under rule 28A of the Rules for issuance of eligibility certificate. The application of the petitioner was considered in the meeting of LLSC held on September 2, 1992 and on the basis of the decision taken in the said meeting, eligibility certificate dated November 6, 1992 (annexure P1) was issued in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no provision in the Rules for amendment/correction of the eligibility certificate. This was conveyed to the petitioner by General Manager, District Industries Centre, Karnal, vide letter annexure P5 dated November 20, 2000. The appeal filed by the petitioner against annexure P5 was dismissed by HLSC in its 29th meeting held on May 16, 2002 and May 17, 2002. The decision of the HLSC was conveyed to the petitioner vide letter annexure P6 sent by Director of Industries, Haryana, through General Manager, District Industries Centre, Karnal. 4.. The petitioner has challenged annexures P5 and P6 by contending that the decisions of the LLSC and HLSC to decline its prayer for issuance of revised eligibility certificate are contrary to the polic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t exemption upto 150 per cent to the small scale units. Shri Jhingan submitted that the petitioner's unit is situated at a place which falls in Zone "A" determined by the State Government and, therefore, the LLSC should have initially granted eligibility certificate for a period of nine years so as to entitle it to claim exemption up to 150 per cent of the fixed capital investment. He further argued that the petitioner cannot be made to suffer due to the mistake of the competent authority, i.e., the LLSC to grant appropriate certificate in terms of rule 28-A(2) read with rule 28-A(5) of the Rules and the policy circulated vide letter dated April 28, 1992. 7.. Shri Jaswant Singh, learned Senior Deputy AdvocateGeneral, Haryana, defended the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of tax exemption in terms of certificate dated December 23, 1992 the petitioner applied for correction of eligibility certificate dated November 6, 1992, without making reference to the provisions under which such an application could be maintained. The LLSC rejected the application as not maintainable and HLSC upheld the decision of the LLSC by observing that no appeal is maintainable against the rejection of the application for review of eligibility certificate. 9.. In our opinion, the decision of the LLSC to decline the petitioner's prayer for making correction in eligibility certificate dated November 6, 1992 and/or to issue revised eligibility certificate cannot be declared illegal because there is no provision in the Act an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
