TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram. Paragraph-6 of the scheme envisages grant of transport subsidy to the industrial unit located in the selected areas in respect of raw materials which are brought into and finished goods which are taken out of such areas. However, industrial units will not be eligible for transport subsidy for internal movement of raw materials and finished goods within such areas. The eligibility period for claiming subsidy may be 5 years, the scheme nowhere provides that only if a new industrial unit continues such manufacturing activity for a period of 5 years that it can claim the transport subsidy. Therefore, even if, as pointed out by the respondents, the petitioner at some later point of time after commencing its production got engaged into the same activity as a job worker, this would not amount to breach of any of the eligibility conditions of the scheme. Transport subsidy would not be available for movement of raw materials as also finished goods as long as the movement thereof is confined between two locations both of which are situated in the North Eastern region. In the present case, even going by the case of the petitioner the raw material was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s aspect of the matter. 5. Case of the petitioner is that its unit fulfilled all the requirements of grant of transport subsidy and for which all the documents were supplied to the department despite which such subsidy was not granted and on account of which the petitioner was unable to repay its dues to the secured creditors and faced bankruptcy. The petitioner had, therefore, claimed the benefit of transport subsidy at prescribed rates with interest. 6. The petitioner has produced a letter dated 07.12.2006 written by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Kailashahar to the Director of Industries and Commerce, Government of Tripura in which it is stated that during his visit at the site it was found that the unit was in running condition. On a subsequent visit he had verified all related documents for transport subsidy and found them all correct. He has also stated that the unit used to bring raw materials from the nearby State Assam for the unit up to March, 2006. However, at present the unit does not bring raw materials and it does job work only. 7. The petitioner made several claims for transport subsidy. However, these benefits were not granted. The petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Eastern Region, the liberalized Scheme is not applicable. In other words, the transportation costs of raw materials which are available in the State of Tripura and which are not brought into the State of Tripura are not entitled to the benefit of the transport subsidy under the Scheme. 9. Coming now to the facts of the instant case, it is not the case of the petitioner that the raw materials for the stone crushing activity, assuming without admitting that this forms a part of manufacturing activity, were brought into the State of Tripura from the non-selected areas or even from the North Eastern Region; the raw materials for the stone crushing activity i.e. boulder stones, etc. were apparently extracted from within the State of Tripura itself. In other words, no transportation of such raw materials from non-selected areas or selected areas ever took place; this is never the case of the petitioner either. That being the indisputable fact, irrespective of whether the boulder stones used by the petitioner for the stone crushing activity are raw materials or not, or whether the stone crushing activity of its unit is a manufacturing activity or not, the condition precedent for availi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised by any of the respondents in their correspondence or even in their affidavit-in-reply filed in response to the petition. He lastly contended that the objection raised by the learned Single Judge is not borne out from any material on record. There is nothing on the record to suggest that the raw material was procured by the petitioner from within the State. In fact, based on the letter dated 07.12.2006 written by the General Manager of District Industrial Centre it is clear that the petitioner was bringing such raw material from the State of Assam. 12. In order to decide these issues we may take note of the relevant terms of the subsidy scheme of 1971. Paragraph 4 of the said scheme is a definition clause. Clause (a) of paragraph-4 defines an industrial unit as to mean an industrial unit where manufacturing programme is carried on. A new industrial unit is defined as to mean an industrial unit which has set up its manufacturing capacity and comes into production on or after the date of commencement of the scheme. It may be noted that the scheme was brought into effect from 15.07.1971. The term selected area would mean several regions and States specified therein includi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ished goods moving entirely by road or other mode of transport in the North-Eastern region, the transport costs will be limited to the amount which the industrial unit might have paid, had the finished goods moved from the location of the industrial units to the nearest railway station by road and thereafter by rail to Siliguri. 13. We do not find the objections as raised by the respondents to oppose the petitioner s claim on transport subsidy are valid. To begin with, the objection that the petitioner s activity did not amount to manufacturing activity has not been raised by the respondents in official correspondence. In any case, it does not require much effort to turn down such an objection. The admitted fact is that the petitioner is engaged in crushing big boulders into small chips of stone used for construction activity. Thus, an entirely new article through the mechanical process which the petitioner subjects the raw material to comes into existence. Further, the objection that having started as a manufacturing unit the petitioner later on was engaged in the activity as a job worker also would not make the petitioner ineligible for transport subsidy. It is the principal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as to include several States and regions including the North Eastern region comprising of the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland and Tripura and the Union Territories of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram. Thus, these States and specified Union Territories formed a common block which was described as a North Eastern region. Clause (i) of paragraph-6 of the scheme, as noted, envisages grant of transport subsidy to the industrial unit located in selected areas in respect of the materials which are brought into and finished products which are taken out of such areas. Clause (ii) of paragraph-6 is an exclusion clause providing that the industrial units will not be eligible for transport subsidy for internal movement of raw materials and finished goods within the State of Jammu Kashmir, the North Eastern region, the State of Himachal Pradesh etc. Combined reading of clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph-6 of the scheme and bearing in mind the fact that the North Eastern region in the entire scheme is referred to as one compact block, would show that the transport subsidy for movement of goods and finished products would be available as long as such movement either originates (in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
