TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (5) TMI 406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure No. 7 to the writ petition. 2.. The petitioner had come up earlier challenging the eligibility certificate, granted by the respondents only for a period of five days on the ground that the production in the petitioner-unit remained closed for a period of more than six months at a stretch. The contention of the petitioner is that the unit continued the production on job basis. It is admitted b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated June 25, 1991 is quashed and the Chairman, Noida is directed to decide the application of the petitioner for grant of eligibility certificate in accordance with law and in view of the observations made above within a period of two months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order of this Court". (Emphasis* supplied). This is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d qualify for sales tax exemption eligibility even though it had taken up job-work for over six months at stretch cannot be accepted. The unit did not manufacture for sales for a period April, 1985 to November, 1985 which is more than six months. In view of this the application for granting eligibility certificate beyond 31st March, 1985 is rejected." 5.. In the judgment dated May 5, 1992 as repo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r remedy against that judgment, the Chairman, Noida took the view absolutely contrary to that expressed by this Court in the judgment dated May 5, 1992. Such action of the Chairman, Noida is deprecated. 6.. After the judgment dated May 5, 1992, the duty of the Chairman, Noida was simply to grant the eligibility certificate following the judgment of this Court. It is a clear case of contempt, thou....