9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnexure P-2, the order dated 25.9.2006 i.e. Annexure P-4 and the order dated 20.9.2011 i.e. Annexure P-5 passed by respondents no.2 to 4 being totally illegal, suffering from material irregularities and based upon misreading, misinterpretation of Rule 28-A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 are liable to be quashed? (ii) Whether the petitioner's firm who had to close down its production for non-availability of raw material i.e. polythene bags as a result of banned imposed by the State of Haryana and Central Government is still liable to make the payment of entire tax exemption availed of by it along with interest chargeable as if no tax exemption was ever availed to it, even though the petitioner's unit had to close down ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee for the last more than two years and the firm was closed. Thereafter, respondent No.4 issued a show cause notice dated 10.3.2006 to the assessee to explain reasons regarding the dis-continuation of production. The assessee vide reply dated 10.4.2006 stated that due to ban on the use of all types of polythene carry bags manufactured from plastic w.e.f. 1.7.1999 by the Haryana Government and Central Government, it was not possible to continue production at least for the next five years. Respondent No.4 vide order dated 23.5.2006 (Annexure P-2) held the appellant to make the payment of entire tax exemption along with interest chargeable if no tax exemption was ever available to it. Accordingly, the assessing authority issued notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be cancelled. This contention had been rejected by the Prohibition Excise and Taxation Commissioner in his order dated October 29, 1998 on the ground that no material had been placed before him which could enable him to conclude that the unit was closed for any circumstances beyond the Here italicized, control of the petitioner. However, we are of the view that it is unnecessary to go into this issue to decide the validity of the cancellation of exemption certificate under subrule (9)(i) of Rule 28A of the Rules. A plain reading of this provision shows that discontinuance of business by a unit or closing down of its business for a continuous period exceeding six months automatically invites the cancellation of the exemption certificate. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
