TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (7) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1995. It is also registered as a dealer with the first respondent. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued orders to provide incentives for newly set up industries in the said G.O. Ms. No. 117, dated March 17, 1993. The petitioner was sanctioned sales tax deferment amounting to Rs. 1,70,11,600 for a period of 10 years commencing from April 7, 1995 (which is the date of commencement of the commercial production) under the said G.O. The petitioner was called upon to pay a tax of Rs. 15,48,639 on the ground that the deferment of sales tax does not apply to purchase of raw material, viz., cotton, which is liable to be taxed at the point of last purchase in the State. 3.. Initially the writ petition was filed challenging the order of the revisional authority in not granting stay of recovery of the tax in demand. Subsequently the petitioner filed WP MP No. 35412 of 1996 seeking amendment of the prayer in the writ petition, viz., for issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the order dated July 1, 1996 passed in file No. 73/96-97 (95-96) and to declare that the sales tax deferment granted by the fourth respondent in the final eligibility certificate No. 20/3/5/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....W.P. Nos. 20197 of 1996, 20207 of 1996 and 27567 of 1996, submits that the final eligibility certificate granted to the petitioner does not specify that deferment of tax is confined to only the sales tax, so it should be deemed that it also includes tax payable on the purchase of the raw material by the petitioner. The other contention of Mr. Raji Reddy is that in case payment of the purchase tax is not deferred, it would go into the pricing structure of the products making them less competitive in the market and thus the purpose of the G.O. will be frustrated. 7.. Mr. Murali Krishna who appeared for Mr. A. Sudershan Reddy, adds that having regard to the wording of G.O. Ms. No. 117 dated March 17, 1993 the scheme of incentive and the purpose for which the incentives are granted, the tax paid by the units on purchase of raw material should also be treated on par with the tax payable by the units on the sale of the products manufactured by them. 8.. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel but we are not persuaded to accept any one of them. Let us now look to the scheme envisaged under G.O. Ms. No. 117, dated March 17, 1993. The said G.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....abad Districts. Area II Nalgonda, Mahaboobnagar, Warangal, Khammam, Medak, Karimnagar, Nizamabad, Kurnool, Cuddapah, Chittoor, Nellore, Vizianagaram and Prakasam Districts. Area III Visakhapatnam (except Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation limits), East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna (except Vijayawada Municipal Corporation limits) Districts. Guntur/R.R. Dist/Hyderabad (except Hyderabad Municipal Corporation limit) Districts. 5. The following are the concessions under this New Comprehensive Scheme: (A)....................... (B) Deferment/Tax holiday on sales tax: Sales tax percentage of deferment/tax holiday and period (on products manufactured in the new industrial units) (i) Medium and Large Scale Industries-Sales Tax Department: Area I Deferment limited to 100 per cent of fixed capital cost in a period of 10 years. Area II Deferment limited to 75 per cent of fixed capital cost in a period of 10 years. Area III Deferment limited to 50 per cent of fixed capital cost in a period of 10 years. ........................ (By order and in the name of the Governor of Andhra Pradesh) M.V. Natarajan Principal Secretary to Government." 9. The petitioners fall under para....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., a tinysector industrial unit, purchased raw cashewnuts from unregistered dealers and converted them into cashew kernels and sold the same. Under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act cashew kernel pressed out of tax suffered cashew was exempt from levy of tax at the sale point. The petitioner claimed exemption under the notification on its purchase turnover of raw cashewnuts on the ground that under the said Act all manufacturers of cashew kernel would be exempt from tax on their sales turnover, therefore the petitioner would derive no benefit under the notification in question. That contention found favour from the learned single Judge who held that the expression "on the turnover of goods manufactured and sold by all tiny-sector industrial units" should be so interpreted having regard to the object of extending tax concession to tiny-sector unit that they would be eligible for exemption from all taxes payable under the Act. With respect to the learned Judge, we are unable to agree with the reasoning and the conclusion reached by him. Merely because the petitioner gets no benefit under the G.O., is no ground to grant a benefit which the G.O. itself does not purport to grant. 12.. Relying....