9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... weeks. Even after the inspection team cleared further investment of ₹ 3.58 crores of the petitioner for eligibility, the State Level Committee has yet to take a decision. This stand of the respondents also is not very clear. If the exemptions scheme as amended from time to time envisaged granting exemption in relation to investments made even after 31.12.2005, subject to fulfilment of conditions, it is difficult to understand how State Level Committee can take a different decision and distinguish the same only on the ground that they have been in implementing the same uniformly. Under such circumstances, this petition is disposed of directing the respondents to take a final decision on the petitioner's eligibility for additiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of the petitioner is that the total investment eligible for such sales tax incentive came to ₹ 94.49 crores (rounded off). As against this, the respondent authorities had granted eligibility certificate only to the extent of ₹ 28.73 crores against the claim of the petitioner of ₹ 47.25 crores for phse I . No eligibility certificate was granted for the second phase of investment. With these grievances, the petitioner had filed Special Civil Application No. 5638 of 2011. Division Bench of this Court in the judgment dated 13.1.2012 disposed of the petition with following directions: 23.1 The respondents shall consider the investment made in the fixed capital and held ineligible other than those made under the head GE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacturing activities were closed down. The company clarified that manufacturing is taking place in night shifts. The clarification of the company and the report of the inspection team has been placed before the State Level Committee for consideration for granting final eligibility certificate with respect to the additional investment of R. 3.58 crores. It is however, stated that the decision is pending due to some administrative reasons. 5. With respect to the second phase of investment, in the reply it has been stated as under: I respectfully say and submit that as per the other two vital direction of this Hon'ble Court, it is most obsequiously submitted that the deponent office had relooked issue and reconsider the inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing in Special Civil Application no.11760 of 2013, the respondents have taken a stand not to extend the benefits for the investment made in second phase of investment after 31.12.2005 to avoid discrimination. 7. This stand of the respondents also is not very clear. If the exemptions scheme as amended from time to time envisaged granting exemption in relation to investments made even after 31.12.2005, subject to fulfilment of conditions, it is difficult to understand how State Level Committee can take a different decision and distinguish the same only on the ground that they have been in implementing the same uniformly. In any case, whatever the decision of the Government, the same should have been communicated to the petitioner. The leas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
