TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the period stipulated in the eligibility certificate. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Samtel India Limited, Faridabad, respondent No. 1, which is an industrial company and engaged in manufacturing of monochrome monitors along with black and white T.V. sets applied for tax benefit for its unit under rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975. In that regard an application in form ST 70 dated May 12, 1995 (annexure P1) was submitted to the Higher Level Screening Committee (for brevity, HLSC ) which vide its decision taken on the application allowed tax benefits by way of sales tax exemption and ordered for the issuance of eligibility certificate (annexure P2). Some corrections were carried out by issuing corrigendum da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 holding that the Commissioner and Secretary, Industries, did not afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner while disposing of its appeal. It was further found that on three occasions, the representatives of respondent No. 1 were not present when no proceedings could take place and on July 4, 2000 its counsel had made personal request for adjournment. In this view of the matter, the writ petition was allowed and the order dated July 28, 2000 (annexure P7) was set aside and accordingly, respondent No. 1 appeared before the Commissioner, Industries. The appeal was allowed vide order dated December 2, 2002 by holding as under: In this particular case, the appellants switched over from monochrome monitors, B W monitors to c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same afresh. The Tribunal vide impugned order dated November 30, 2005 (annexure P10) allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by HLSC declining the application of respondent No. 1. The operative part of the order passed by the Tribunal shows that it has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this court in State of Haryana v. Bharti Teletech Limited, Gurgaon [C. W.P. No. 11884 of 2003, decided on July 31, 2003]. A Division Bench of this court while interpreting the expression expansion/diversification of industrial unit as defined in sub-rule (2)(d) of rule 28A of the Rules had held as under: The expression 'expansion/diversification of industrial unit' as defined in sub-rule (2)(d) of rule 28A means a cap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conceded that the impugned order has already been implemented and the eligibility certificate granted to respondent No. 1 was amended by the competent authority in pursuance of the direction given by respondent No. 2 . He further conceded that by this time, respondent No. 1 must have availed the benefit of sales tax exemption on the additional products. This being the position, we do not find any justification to entertain the writ petition filed at this belated stage; and . . . We asked the learned State counsel as to what is the distinction between the order passed by the Division Bench on July 31, 2003 in Bharti Teletech Limited's case [C. W.P. No. 11884 of 2003] and the present petition. She has submitted that there the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
