9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 898X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a unit, another unit of the same company, the benefit given to the assessee-industrial unit under such incentive scheme was to be reduced to that extent of plant and machinery shifted, i.e., Rs. 84.31 lacs. The assessee took the matter further before the Tax Board against the decision of the SLSC and Tax Board vide its impugned order dated February 1, 2006 approved the decision of the SLSC and being aggrieved of the same, the assessee has approached this court under section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 raising the question of law as to whether the SLSC was justified in reducing the quantum of eligible investment for grant of benefit under the aforesaid incentive scheme to that extent. The learned counsel for the assessee Mr. Ramit Mehta has urged that mere shifting of part of the plant and machinery from Tonk to Bhilwara where both the units of the petitioner-assessee manufacture same product, i.e., ready-made garment was not prohibited either under the aforesaid Incentive Scheme, 1998 or under the provisions of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. He submits that the fixed capital investment made within the State of Rajasthan continued to remain within the State of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ernment is reflected very clearly by such broad definition of the new industrial unit and that to encourage the industrial investment culture and promote investment within the State of Rajasthan obviously for the betterment of economic conditions of people and industrial development of the State. In the light of this, it can hardly be appreciated that the competent authorities comprising of senior bureaucrats in the SLSC while dealing with this issue took such a pedantic and narrow approach and decided to reduce the eligible capital investment merely on the basis of shifting of plant and machinery from one place to another under the same ownership and management on account of business and commercial expediency. The benefit of incentive scheme given to the industrial unit as one assessee and it is not split unit-wise in the scheme. The definition of new industrial unit in clause 2(k) of the Incentive Scheme of 1998 is as under: 2(k)(i) 'New industrial unit' means an industrial unit which commences commercial production during the operative period of this Scheme including a unit set up on the site of an existing industrial unit by making separately identifiable cap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatutory definition. Such attitude on the part of competent screening bodies discourages rather than encouraging investment and the objective of State Government can hardly be achieved by such an approach. The honourable Supreme Court in Mangalore Chemicals Fertilizers Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1991] 83 STC 234; AIR 1992 SC 152 has held as under: (at page 245 of STC) The choice between a strict and a liberal construction arises only in case of doubt in regard to the intention of the Legislature manifest on the statutory language. Indeed, the need to resort to any interpretative process arises only where the meaning is not manifest on the plain words of the statute. If the words are plain and clear and directly convey the meaning, there is no need for any interpretation. It appears to us the true rule of construction of a provisions as to exemption is the one stated by this court in Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd. [1991] 83 STC 251; AIR 1991 SC 2049 at page 2051; [1991] 1 JT 151 at page 155: (at page 255 of 83 STC) '. . . Truly, speaking, liberal and strict construction of an exemption provision is to be invoked at different stages ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eaning unmindful of the consequence of such interpretation. It was the predominant method of reading statutes. More often than not, such grammatical and literal interpretation leads to unjust results which the Legislature never intended. The golden rule of giving undue importance to grammatical and literal meaning of late gave place to 'rule of legislative intent'. The world over, the principle of interpretation according to the legislative intent is accepted to be more logical. 28.. When the law to be applied in a given case prescribes interpretation of statute, the court has to ascertain the facts and then interpret the law to apply to such facts. Interpretation cannot be in a vacuum or in relation to hypothetical facts. It is the function of the Legislature to say what shall be the law and it is only the court to say what the law is. . . . 33.. It is also well-settled that to arrive at the intention of the legislation depending on the objects for which the enactment is made, the court can resort to historical, contextual and purposive interpretation leaving textual interpretation aside. 34.. Francis Bennion: Statutory Interpretation, referred to . . . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ALL ER 155 (CA), page 164 were pressed into service for emulation. The view of Denning L. J., that 'judicial heroics' were warranted to cope with the difficulties arising in statutory interpretation, was severely criticized by the House of Lords in Magor St. Mellons Rural District Council v. Newport Corporation [1951] 2 ALL ER 839 page 841. Lord Simonds said, 'the duty of the court is to interpret the words that the Legislature has used. Those words may be ambiguous, but, even if they are, the power and duty of the court to travel outside them on a voyage of discovery are strictly limited'. 'It appears to me', said Lord Simonds, 'to be a naked usurpation of legislative function under the thin disguise of interpretation'. Lord Morton observed: 'these heroics are out of place'. Lord Tucker said, 'Your Lordships would be acting in a legislative rather than a judicial capacity if the view put forward by Denning, L.J., were to prevail'. This disapproval of Denning L. J.'s approach was cited with approval by this court in Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court [1990] 3 SCC 682; [199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
