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

2013 (3) TMI 584

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... entral Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, "the CST Act") and order dated February 18, 2005 (P9). M/s. Ekta Plastics, Ratera, District Bhiwani, respondent No. 3 set up a new industrial unit at village Ratera in the year 1995. The unit was granted benefits of sales tax exemption under rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (for short, "the Rules") for a period of nine years for an amount of Rs. 203.87 lacs from May 5, 1995 to May 4, 2004. The petitioners stood surety to respondent No. 3 by signing of form ST50 as per rule 61 of the Rules to an extent of Rs. 6 lacs. Copies of the said surety bonds are dated May 10, 1996 (annexures P3 and P4). The company availed of exemption for some years and thereafter closed its business. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on July 27, 2003. Learned counsel has referred to the surety bonds (P3 and P4) given by the petitioners. The first surety bond was given in May, 1995. The petitioners have stood surety in one year only. Thereafter, the exemption certificate issued to the company for the year 1995-96 expired on June 30, 1995. Thus the petitioners had stood surety with effect from May 16, 1995 till June 30, 1995 when the exemption had expired. The exemption certificate was subsequently got renewed by respondent No. 3 by furnishing fresh application in respect of which, the petitioners are not the surety. Learned counsel has referred to the judgment of this court in a case of Vinod Kumar, Partner, M/s. Agro India, Kurukshetra v. State of Haryana through Asses .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r following the procedure as made out in rule 28A(5) and (6) of the Rules. The eligible industrial unit is to make an application for grant of exemption certificate every year. This application is required to be accompanied by a surety bond in form ST-50. Rule 28A(6)(a)(ii) reads as under: "(ii) tax exemption, to either execute a surety bond in form S.T. 50 equivalent to 15 per cent of the amount of notional sales tax liability sought to be exempted or a bank guarantee for that amount in a year, which shall be valid for the period extending to five years after the expiry of total period of tax exemption." This exemption certificate is valid from the date of issue till 30th June of the next year as per rule 28A(6)(b). However as per rule 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... renew the exemption/entitlement certificate within 30 days of the making of the application for renewal failing which the certificate shall remain valid until the renewal is refused or the certificate otherwise expires. The exemption/entitlement certificate on renewal shall unless cancelled or withdrawn be valid from 1st of July of the year in which the application is made if it is in time or otherwise from the date of application to 30th June, next or when the eligibility certificate expires or the cumulative notional sales tax liability first exceeds the quantum of tax exemption/ deferment fixed for the unit, whichever is earlier. (b) If the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner in-charge of the district finds that the application for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ter giving the applicant an opportunity of hearing. In the present case, the exemption certificate was renewed up to June 30, 1997. It is not the case of the respondent-Department that the petitioners had stood surety again in any subsequent year. The respondents in the written statement have not stated that the petitioners stood surety for respondent No. 3-company in the year 1996-97. The precise case of the petitioners is that the petitioners stood surety by annexures P3 and P4 to respondent No. 3 for a particular period, i.e., up to June 30, 1995. In the case of sales tax exemption, since the petitioners did not give the additional security for the subsequent years, therefore, they are not liable to make the payment of sales tax for any .....

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