Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

SHAIFALI ROLLS LIMITED AND 1 Versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND 3

2016 (7) TMI 285 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Sales tax exemption scheme - the case 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”. - Gujarat Sales Tax - Held that:- When High Court in a judgment delivered in January, 2012 had directed the State authorities to take ce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 additional sum of ₹ 3.58 crores and convey the same to the petitioner latest by 30th July, 2016 briefly s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sistant GOVERNMENT PLEADER ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to grant final eligibility certificate to the tune of actual project investment of ₹ 94,49,84,000/-. 2. Brief facts are as under: After the devastating earthquake which took place on 26.1.2001 and which caused extensive damage in the Kutch district, the State Government framed sales tax incentive scheme under which subject to fulfilment of conditions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gainst 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 c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l and only if, the petitioner is found to have fulfilled the criteria provided under the Scheme, the same may be considered for the purpose of tax incentives. 23.3 The Final Eligibility Certificate on the basis of this scrutiny shall be prepared within twelve weeks of receipt of this Order and the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. 24. This petition shall stand disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. 3. Despite such directions, since the respondents did not grant final .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be given further benefit of investment of ₹ 3,58,62,635/-. However, it was found that 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 pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er Committee had already taken a decision that all the investment made upto 31.12.2005 shall only be considered but however, the identical issue has been challenged in Special Civil Application no.11768 of 2013 which is subject matter of consideration before this Hon'ble Court and therefore, the deponent office has taken a stand to not to extend the benefits particularly for the investment under phase-2 after date of 31.12.2005 as well as for the production of forging steel to avoid of any t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e has yet to take a decision. Likewise, regarding the further investments stated to have been made by the petitioner in the second phase of investment, the only answer given is that High Power Committee has already taken a decision that all investments made upto 31.12.2005 only shall be considered. Since identical issue is pending 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 afte .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version