2004 (12) TMI 378

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered by   S.N. VARIAVA, J.-This appeal is against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 16th May, 2002. 2.. Briefly stated the facts are as follows: M/s. Dhampur Sugar Mills Limited (hereinafter called "the Company") is having its registered office at Dhampur, Bijnore District, U.P. It carries on business of manufacturing sugar. In 1991 it opened, at Dhampur, a unit manufacturing chemicals. In 1993, it opened a unit manufacturing particle board at Agwanpur, Moradabad District, U.P. In 1993, it established another unit manufacturing Sugar at Rozagaon, Barabanki District and in 1995 it established a unit manufacturing Sugar at Asmoli, Moradabad District, U.P. By a notification dated 27th July, 1991 certain exemptions....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s a dispute whether such a review application was received. However, for our purposes, it is not necessary to go into this dispute. But it must be noticed that the only complaint was in respect of reduction of its claim for capital investment. On 25th August, 1994, an eligibility certificate was issued to the Agwanpur unit for tax relief for a period of nine years, i.e., from 29th September, 1993 to 28th September, 2002, or 125 per cent of capital investment of Rs. 7.89 crores. On 13th November, 1995, the company filed an application in form XLVI to the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Mora- dabad, in respect of the Asmoli Sugar unit. On 21st of February, 1997, another notification was issued in respect of units where t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax Tribunal. This appeal came to be rejected on 20th March, 2001. In the meantime, on 5th of November, 2001 an eligibility certificate was issued to the Rozagaon Sugar unit granting relief for a period of 14 months, i.e., from 24th January, 2001 to 20th March, 2002 or 125 per cent of the capital investment of Rs. 20.30 crores. 4.. Against the rejection of its appeal by the Trade Tax Tribunal, the company filed a trade tax revision in the High Court. This has been allowed by the High Court by the impugned judgment. 5.. The question before this Court is whether the High Court has erred in allowing such a belated joint application when the company itself had, on earlier occasions, filed separate applications in respect of each of its ....