9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the petitioners do not relate to industries, which were set up before the promise was given relating to the exemption in the tax. Therefore, in the opinion of this court, on the facts and circumstances of the case there is no question of violation of doctrine of legitimate expectation, nor is the Government in the present case bound by principle of promissory estoppel, as the impugned notification was issued only consequent to the amendment in section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, vide Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 2007. Appeal dismissed. - Writ Petition No. 1018 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 24-12-2008 - PRAFULLA C. PANT , J. PRAFULLA C. PANT J. By means of this writ petition, moved under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought declaration to the effect that Notification No. 698/XXVII (8) Commercial Tax (VAT)/ 2007, dated November 14, 2007, is illegal, ultra vires and void. Also writ in the nature of certiorari has been sought quashing the provisional assessment orders dated March 20, 2008, for the months of April 2007 and January 2008, issued by the Deputy Commissioner (Tax Assessment) IV, Commercial Tax, Dehradun, and the penalty order dated A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid plots allotted to it, and started its commercial production on June 27, 2006, availing of the tax concession. However, the State Government vide Notification No. 698/XXVII (8) Commercial Tax (VAT)/2007, dated November 14, 2007 (copy of which is annexure 6 to the writ petition) abruptly rescinded the earlier notification dated January 9, 2006. Aggrieved by the said subsequent notification, the petitioner made a representation to respondent No. 1, but to no avail. Instead, the petitioner was served with the impugned notices of assessment and the penalty by the respondent authorities. The petitioner's case is that the withdrawal of concession in the Central sales tax by the State Government, is violative of doctrine of promissory estoppel and also against the principle of legitimate expectation. Referring to the various cases, particularly Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of U.P. [1979] 44 STC 42 (SC); [1979] 2 SCC 409, U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. v. Sant Steels Alloys (P) Ltd. [2008] 2 SCC 777, Southern Petro-Chemical Industries Co. Ltd. v. Electricity Inspector of ETIO [2007] 5 SCC 447 and S.L. Srinivasa Jute Twine Mills (P) Ltd. v. Union of Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and doctrine of legitimate expectation, raised by the petitioner, it is stated in the counter-affidavit that the petitioner had already established its factory before the notification dated January 9, 2006, granting tax exemption, was issued. It is also stated in the counter-affidavit that plea of promissory estoppel is not available against the changes brought about by the statute. It is also stated in the counteraffidavit that the State Government has statutory power to reduce or enhance the rate of tax on any class of goods. It is further stated that the respondents have made no promise to the petitioner. In para 27 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner had already purchased the land where the factory is established eight months before the issuance of the notification granting the concession. In the rejoinder affidavit, filed on behalf of the petitioner, the averments made in the writ petition are reiterated enclosing the copy of Industrial Policy, 2003 of the Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun, as annexure 2 to the rejoinder affidavit. Before further discussion, this court thinks it just and proper to mention here the relevant provision of law, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate of ten per cent or at the rate applicable to the sale or purchase of goods inside the appropriate State, whichever is higher, and (c) in the case of goods, the sale or, as the case may be, the purchase of which is, under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, exempt from tax generally shall be nil. (2) The tax payable by any dealer on his turnover in so far as the turnover or any part thereof relates to the sale of goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce not falling within sub-section (1), shall be at the rate applicable to the sale or purchase of such goods inside the appropriate State under the sales tax law of that State. Explanation. For the purposes of this sub-section, a dealer shall be deemed to be a dealer liable to pay tax under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, notwithstanding that he, in fact, may not be so liable under that law. Pre-amendment 2007 Post amendment 2007 And for the purpose of making any such calculation under clause (a) or clause (b), any such dealer shall be deemed, to be a dealer liable to pay tax under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, notwithstanding that he, in fact, may not be so liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registration referred to in clause (b) or for the packing of any containers or other materials, specified in the certificate of registration referred to in clause (c). (4) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner (a) A declaration duly filled and signed by the registered dealer to whom the goods are sold containing the prescribed particulars in a prescribed from obtained from the prescribed authority; or (b) If the goods are sold to the Government, not being a registered dealer, a certificate in the prescribed form duly filled and signed by a duly authorized officer of the Government: Provided that the declaration referred to in clause (a) is furnished within the prescribed time or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit. (4) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner a declaration duly filled and signed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o such class of persons as may be specified in the notification, no tax under this Act shall be payable or the tax on such sales shall be calculated at such lower rates than those specified in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) as may be mentioned in the notification. (b) that in respect of all sales of goods or sales of such classes of goods as may be specified in the notification, which are made, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, to a registered dealer by any dealer having his place of business in the State or by any class of such dealers as may be specified in the notification, to any person or to such class of persons as may be specified in the notification, no tax under this Act shall be payable or the tax on such sales shall be calculated at such lower rates than those specified in sub-section (1) as may be mentioned in the notification. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, no tax under this Act shall be payable by any dealer in respect of sale of any goods made by such dealer, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, to a registered dealer for the purpose of setting up, operation, maintenance, manufacture, trading, production, pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e dealer selling such goods furnishes to the prescribed authority referred to in sub-section (4) a declaration in the prescribed manner on the prescribed form obtained from the authority specified by the Central Government under sub-section (6) duly filled in and signed by the registered dealer to whom such goods are sold. Explanation. For the purposes of sub-section (6), the expression special economic zone has the meaning assigned to it in clause (iii) to Explanation 2 to the proviso to section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944). Explanation. For the purposes of sub-section (6), the expression special economic zone has the meaning assigned to it in clause (iii) to Explanation 2 to the proviso to section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944). On behalf of the petitioners, it is argued that the abovementioned changes made vide Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2007, with effect from April 1, 2007, do not require the Government to withdraw the concession already granted in the rate of tax to a registered dealer. It is further submitted that under sub-section (5) of section 8, the State Government, in the public interest, on fulfilment of requirements ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, filed on behalf of the parties, it is very clear that the industrial policy was issued in the year 2003 in which there is no mention of providing concession in the Central Sales Tax Act. What mainly promised in the industrial policy by the Government of India, is that the new industrial units were to get exemption in Central excise and income-tax. The present case does not relate to any issue relating to Central excise or income-tax. Apart from this, what is most important in this case is that in pursuance of the industrial policy of 2003, the petitioner had already complied and got allotted the plots in industrial area of State in the year 2005 to set up its factory, while notification dated January 9, 2006, relating to exemption in Central sales tax, was issued in the year 2006. After the factory has been established, the petitioner cannot say that he was allured in setting up the industry only for the reason that the Government had promised reduced rate of Central sales tax, notification in respect of which was in fact issued subsequent to the establishment of the factory. On behalf of the petitioner, reliance is placed in para 24 of Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
