TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (2) TMI 357
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12, 1993 of a division Bench Reported in [1993] 89 STC 277 (Lokendra Industries v. State) of the Rajasthan High Court by which a bunch of writ petitions were allowed and the impugned notification dated May 7, 1990 withdrawing the benefit of a scheme granting exemption under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and the State Sales Tax Act w.e.f. May 23, 1987 in respect of certain industries, was quashed. The material facts are these: The scheme under which the writ petitioners claimed certain exemption from payment of tax under the State Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act came into effect on May 23, 1987. A notification dated May 7, 1990 was issued which had the effect of withdrawing that benefit in respect of certain industries s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal is now limited only to the claim for exemption under the Central Sales Tax Act. 3.. In view of the limited question, as indicated earlier, the point for consideration is whether the action of withdrawing the benefit under the Central Sales Tax Act by the notification dated May 7, 1990, found to be invalid by the High Court, is assailable. In our opinion, that part of the High Court's judgment does not call for any interference. The mere fact that action was taken to restore that benefit once again w.e.f. July 26, 1991 much prior to delivery of the judgment by the High Court on January 12, 1993 is a strong indication of the absence of any public interest to support withdrawal of that concession. Moreover, the State Government has bee....