TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scheme. Respondents have no jurisdiction to cancel such eligibility certificate - petitioner not liable to tax - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - Writ Petition Nos.24349, 28371, 28359, 24504 & 20589 of 2004 and W.P.M.P.No.29778 of 2004 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Natarajan For the Respondents : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, AGP ORDER Heard Mr.K.S.Natarajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, in all the writ petitions. 2. The petitioner, in all these writ petitions, M/s.Padmashri Oil Refineries Pvt. Ltd., is a registered dealer, on the file of the seco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 11.02.2000, permitting the petitioner to avail the waiver of sales tax to a sum of ₹ 80,41,000/-, for five years from 06.08.1998 to 05.08.2003, as per the conditions prescribed therein. It appears that the petitioner was unable to procure sufficient quantity of kernals / seeds, as a result of which without raw material, they could not undertake manufacturing process to manufacture edible oil. Therefore, they approached the Industries Department to amend the Eligibility Certificate, requesting them to manufacture edible oil for kernals / seeds as well as Refined edible oils from seed / crude oil, like, sunflower, soya and palmolein etc., and bye-products as well as oil and oil cake and oil waste muddy (soap stock). This request made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner rushed to this Court and filed a writ petition in W.P.No.35140 of 2002 to quash the said notice. The said writ petition was disposed of, by an order, dated 11.09.2002, directing the petitioner to produce the Amended Certificate, before the respondents and to pursue the matter before the first respondent. Subsequently, the General Manager of the District Industries Center, Vellore, addressed a letter to the petitioner's Assessing Officer, namely, the second respondent, on 03.03.2003, stating that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of IFST deferral / waiver benefit. This communication, i.e., the effect of the amended certificate, was brought to the notice of the second respondent and stated that subject to the conditions st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s entitled to the benefit of waiver scheme. If that is the legal position, then, obviously, the respondents could not have assessed the petitioner to tax, ignoring the said Eligibility Certificate. Hence, on the said short ground, the petitioner is entitled to succeed. 9. Accordingly, W.P.Nos.28371, 28359, 24349 and 24504 of 2004 are allowed and the impugned orders are quashed, as no record is being placed before this Court, by the respondents, to show that the amended Eligibility Certificate, dated 28.08.2002, has been either modified, cancelled or amended further by the competent authority and the respondents have no jurisdiction to cancel such eligibility certificate. 10. In the light of the above, no orders are required in W.P.No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
