9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (11) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy issued by means of order dated 10th April, 1990 for a period of six years. However, during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is not pressing the relief for extension of eligibility certificate for six years. but is challenging the impugned order on the ground that the exemption granted to the petitioner for the period 9-8-1985 to 12-7-1981 is not sustainable since the petitioner, in any case, is entitled for exemption for a period of four years after expiry of six months from the starting date of production or from the first date of sale. 4. According to the petitioner's case, he has obtained the registration under the small scale industry and after obtaining the said registration has t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption for the period of six years was, since the petitioner obtained registration under the Factories Act only with effect from l1th August, 1989, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for exemption after 1st August 1986. In fact, it was mentioned therein, that the unit of the petitioner remained closed from 23rd July, 1985 to 31st July 1986, so the unit is entitled for exemption upto 22nd July, 1986 only and as the petitioner has not made sale within six months from the date of production it is entitled for exemption after completion of six months from the date of production. It is on this ground the impugned order confined the grant of exemption by issuing the eligibility certificate for the period 9th August, 1985 to 22nd July, 1986. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and circumstances of this case. It is not in dispute, on the starting date of production, which according to the respondent, is February 9, 1985, and it is also not in dispute that in case the eligibility certificate is to be granted to this unit it could only be after expiry of six months from that date which would be from 9th August, 1985, The question to be considered is whether the said unit is to be treated having an investment of ₹ 3 lacs or a unit having an investment of more than ₹ 3 lacs. In case it is a unit which could be said to be a unit having an investment of ₹ 3 lacs, again it is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel, then such a unit would get exemption for a period of four years from the afor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-A of U. P. Sales Tax Act, as follows : - (e) fulfilling all the conditions specified in this Act or rules or notification made the renunder in regard to grant of facility under this section on the date from which such facility may be granted to him. **.. ** ... It speaks about a new unit fulfilling all the conditions specified under this Act, rules or notification on the date from which such facility is to be granted to it. Further Section 4-A (1) directs granting of exemption of Sales Tax : quot;... .from such date on or after the date of starting production as may be specified by the State Government in such notification which may be the date of the notification or a date prior or subsequent to the date of such notif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tanding Counsel relied on the following words which is after sub-clause (ii) of clause (e) Explanation (i) of sub-section (6) of Section 4-A, but does not include and also sub-clause (ii) following thereafter : - any addition to or extension of an existing factory or workshop. The contention is that any unit which makes addition to or extention of an existing factory would not be included for such a benefit as it would not be treated to be a new unit under Section 4-A and since petitioner unit while shifting made further investment making it to be more than ₹ 3 lacs would amount to addition or extension and thus disentitled for being treated as a new unit. The argument is not sustainable, firstly, this case is neither set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is defined under this section and is to mean the investment in land and building and such plant, machinery equipment, apparatus and components as is necessary for the establishment or running of the factory or workshop of the units. Thus any such investment could only be considered for finding whether such unit has invested ₹ 3 lacs or more on or prior to the date of facility to be given to such unit. Any subsequent expenditure in the same unit under this Act would not disentitle such unit for the grant of exemption for a period he is entitled, if otherwise qualified on that date. Any subsequent investment may be in a given case a case of addition or extention. Thus on the overall consideration we are of the view for the purpose of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
