9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation issued by the State of Kerala, is involved. 3. The appeals have been preferred both by the State (Revenue) as well as by the Industrial unit. The short controversy is with respect to the entitlement to exemption. The Revenue contends that the exemption limit by five years in point of time was to commence from the date of approval by the Central Government, to the approval to the project. The assessees had on the other hand contended that the exemption would commence from the date of commencement of production. 4. The relevant notification, granting the exemption in question, reads as follows : "SCHEDULE -VI Goods the sale of which to Industrial undertakings/manufacturers/ dealers or the purchase of goods by industrial undertakin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority had commuted the period of five years from 16-12-1993. The Revision to the High Court was time barred. The High Court refused to condone the delay. Consequently the Revenue is in appeals and the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 36394 of 2011 is filed by the assessee. The Division Bench had remitted the matter for fresh consideration, even though the single Judge had granted some measure of relief by reducing the penalty. 6. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue by relying on the terms of the notification that in the present case, the Central Government had in fact, granted its approval when the permission letter was issued on 16-12-1993 to the assessees which enabled it to proceed further to import capital goods and start exporti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rst Schedule of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act in relation to 100% EO used for manufacture of goods reads as follows : "Exemption shall be for a period of five years on the date of approval of such units by the Central Government." 8. In this case, letter dated 16-12-1993 on a plain reading appears to be a mere permission. Apart from setting out the items in respect of which the EOU or the Unit could claim exemption, other conditions included, inter alia, that the entire production had to be exported to General Currency Area/Hard Currency Area countries and that the value addition would be a minimum of 67 per cent and that the unit had to maintain value addition in case external commercial borrowing is resorted to. 9. Furthermore, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of commencement should be the date when the exemption also becomes determinable cannot be accepted. Another reason why such a contention is unfeasible is that it injects subjectivity with regard to assessment of proceedings itself. In a given case, the unit-holder may be vigilant and set up his or its unit early whereas in another case, the concerned unit-holder may be laid back or drags its feet resulting in the unit not commencing production. In the latter case, though it might have secured approval, the delay in the commencement of production should not be rewarded with an exemption. 15. For the above-reasons, the court holds that date of approval in this case was 27-10-1994 and that would be the reckonable date for grant of exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
