1991 (1) TMI 428

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioner was granted eligibility certificate stating that it would be entitled to exemption for a period of five years from March 9, 1984. Armed with this eligibility certificate, the petitioner started carrying on its business assuming that it was entitled to exemption for a period of five years from March 9, 1984. On September 10, 1987, however, the Joint Director of Industries sent a letter to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r granting exemption to the petitioner for a period of five years merely on the ground that the earlier order was wrong. It was urged that such a power vests only in the Commissioner under section 4A(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The second ground of attack is that in any case the petitioner's unit was legally entitled to exemption for a period of five years and consequently the Divisional L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that a unit located in Meerut and having capital investment of less than three lacs was at the relevant time entitled only to three years' exemption. It is, however, not necessary to decide the issue whether the petitioner was entitled to the grant of exemption for a period of five years as contended by the petitioner or only for three years as urged by the learned Standing Counsel in view o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....period of exemption granted to the petitioner from five years to three years merely on the ground that in its view its earlier order disclosed an error. The power to correct errors on merits is not an inherent power and cannot be exercised unless specifically conferred by statute. Even if, therefore, the Divisional Level Committee felt that its earlier order suffered from error, it could not modif....