9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and also for a direction to respondents Nos. 3 to 5 to issue an eligibility certificate to the petitioner for the period from March 25, 1994 to March 24, 2003 for grant of exemption. 2.. Petitioner-company has set up a factory at Village Satrati, District Khargone, which has been alleged to be a backward district. The finished products of the petitioner are cotton yarn and blended yarn. The production of the unit had commenced from March 25, 1994. The respondent No. 3, State Level Committee, in its meeting held on September 27, 1995 resolved to give to the petitioner exemption from payment of sales tax for a period of five years from March 25, 1994 to March 24, 1999 under Notification F. No. A3-4181(35)-ST-V dated October 23, 1981 read w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondents for the compliance of the orders passed by the High Court. Thereafter, the State Level Committee passed another resolution dated December 29, 2000 stating therein that the petitioner's industry is not a pioneer industry within the definition of Subsidy Rules, 1989 and, therefore, petitioner-company is not entitled for issue of any eligibility certificate. Copy of this resolution is annexure "R-1". Thereafter the petitioner filed a contempt petition on January 9, 2001 and the notices were directed to be issued and by order dated November 23, 2001 this Court disposed of the aforesaid contempt petition. In the meantime respondent No. 1 issued demand notices dated February 15, 2001 (annexure "E"); February ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3, 1981 (annexure "P-2") and dated March 31, 1992 (annexure "P-3") which have been issued under section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and also under sections 6 and 7 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. He urged that as per the aforesaid notifications only three conditions are required to be fulfilled by the petitioner-company which the company is fulfilling. His further submission was that the Director of Industries have already issued certificate of pioneer status for getting sales tax concession to the petitioner-company vide letter dated October 16, 1997 and this letter is still in force and has not been withdrawn by the State Government up ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cate and thereafter the State Level Committee in its meeting dated October 29, 1997 had already taken a decision for extending the facility to the petitioner-company from five years to nine years, i.e., March 25, 1994 to March 24, 2003 and thereafter the petitioner has already entered into an agreement dated December 22, 1997 and it is true that by letter dated October 16, 1997 (annexure "P") the Director of Industries has already granted certificate of pioneer status for getting sales tax concessions to the petitioner-company which up till now has not been either cancelled or withdrawn by the State Government despite the resolution dated December 29, 2000 (annexure "R-1"). 8.. I have also perused annexure "R-1&quo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In another Writ Petition No. 746 of 1999 by order dated August 25, 1999 this Court in the case of Prime Solvent Extraction Ltd. v. State of M.P., in the similar set of facts and circumstances has held that the notification granting exemption from payment of sales tax to the pioneer industry under section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 has the force of law. Its efficacy cannot be whittled down by any executive order. The State Government has no option but to honour its commitment. The rule of "promissory estoppel" and the emerging doctrine of "substantive legitimate expectation" also do not permit the Government to wriggle out of its unequivocal promise. The court has further held that the notificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
