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 appellant was entitled to transport subsidy under the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 for raw materials used in its stone-crushing unit when the movement of such raw materials was confined within the North Eastern Region.
Analysis: The scheme granted transport subsidy to industrial units located in selected areas for raw materials brought into, and finished goods taken out of, those areas, while excluding internal movement of raw materials and finished goods within the North Eastern Region. The quantification formula for the North Eastern Region also indicated that subsidy was intended only where movement involved Siliguri and the industrial unit's location, showing that inter-regional movement was the relevant condition. On the facts, even accepting the appellant's case that raw materials were procured from Assam, Assam formed part of the North Eastern Region, so the movement remained wholly within the regional block covered by the exclusion.
Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to transport subsidy, and the claim was rightly rejected.