Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (3) TMI 700

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rom March 25, 1994 to March 24, 2003 for grant of exemption. 2.. Petitioner-company has set up a factory at Village Satrati, District Khargone, which has been alleged to be a backward district. The finished products of the petitioner are cotton yarn and blended yarn. The production of the unit had commenced from March 25, 1994. The respondent No. 3, State Level Committee, in its meeting held on September 27, 1995 resolved to give to the petitioner exemption from payment of sales tax for a period of five years from March 25, 1994 to March 24, 1999 under Notification F. No. A3-4181(35)-ST-V dated October 23, 1981 read with Notification No. A-31-92-ST-V (57) dated March 31, 1992. Again the State Level Committee in its meeting dated October .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lution dated December 29, 2000 stating therein that the petitioner's industry is not a pioneer industry within the definition of Subsidy Rules, 1989 and, therefore, petitioner-company is not entitled for issue of any eligibility certificate. Copy of this resolution is annexure R-1 . Thereafter the petitioner filed a contempt petition on January 9, 2001 and the notices were directed to be issued and by order dated November 23, 2001 this Court disposed of the aforesaid contempt petition. In the meantime respondent No. 1 issued demand notices dated February 15, 2001 (annexure E ); February 14, 2001 (annexure E-1 ); February 15, 2001 (annexures F and F-1 ) against which the petitioner filed this petition, challenging the aforesaid act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tax Act, 1958 and under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. He urged that as per the aforesaid notifications only three conditions are required to be fulfilled by the petitioner-company which the company is fulfilling. His further submission was that the Director of Industries have already issued certificate of pioneer status for getting sales tax concession to the petitioner-company vide letter dated October 16, 1997 and this letter is still in force and has not been withdrawn by the State Government up till now and the State Level Committee or the State Government has also not cancelled the same. His further submission was that in pursuance of resolution dated October 29, 1997 petitioner-company has already executed agreement dated December 22, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an agreement dated December 22, 1997 and it is true that by letter dated October 16, 1997 (annexure P ) the Director of Industries has already granted certificate of pioneer status for getting sales tax concessions to the petitioner-company which up till now has not been either cancelled or withdrawn by the State Government despite the resolution dated December 29, 2000 (annexure R-1 ). 8.. I have also perused annexure R-1 . In this resolution respondent No. 5, State Level Committee, has not stated anything either about cancellation or withdrawal of the status of pioneer industry to the petitioner. They have simply stated that now we have stopped from issuing such certificate with effect from July 1, 1998 and this letter of dated Jul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h General Sales Tax Act, 1958 has the force of law. Its efficacy cannot be whittled down by any executive order. The State Government has no option but to honour its commitment. The rule of promissory estoppel and the emerging doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation also do not permit the Government to wriggle out of its unequivocal promise. The court has further held that the notification has not been rescinded and has also discussed the object of granting the exemption. The learned single Judge has also placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case See page 170 supra. of State of Madhya Pradesh v. G.S. Dall and Flour Mills reported in [1991] 80 STC 138; (1992) Supp 1 SCC 150, and the same has also been cited by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates