TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (1) TMI 428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y 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 the petitioner stating that its....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner 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 Level Committee had committed no e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 of the fact that the petition is ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner 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 modify the order passed by it in favour of t....