Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the authorities were justified in fixing an artificial cut-off date under the exemption notification and excluding capital investment made before 1 April 1994 while determining the petitioner's eligibility for exemption for conversion of its unit into an exporting unit.
Analysis: The notification granting incentive to exporting units prescribed the eligible categories, the period within which the unit had to be recognised or converted, and the limits for exemption, but it did not provide any anterior cut-off date for excluding earlier capital investment. The scheme showed that the capital investment in fixed assets up to the date of recognition of the unit as a 100 per cent export-oriented or exporting unit was the relevant basis for exemption. A cut-off date could not be superimposed by the State Level Committee or approved by the State Appellate Forum when the notification itself did not contain such a restriction.
Conclusion: The exclusion of investment made before 1 April 1994 was unjustified, and the petitioner was entitled to exemption on the full qualifying capital investment up to the date of recognition.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification does not prescribe a cut-off date, the authorities cannot introduce one to curtail the statutory benefit; the exemption must be determined strictly according to the terms of the notification.