TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (12) TMI 697
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....July 4, 2008. Case of the petitioner is that it is a company under the Companies Act, 1956. The State of Haryana declared its Industrial Policy and framed rule 28A of the Rules, which, inter alia, provides for exemption from sales tax to the extent of specified quantum on conditions specified therein. The operative period mentioned in the Rules is from April 1, 1988 to July 1997. The petitioner was making investment prior to 1996. One of the conditions of eligibility is that the product to be manufactured should not be in the negative list, i.e., should not be in Schedule III appended to the Rules. On December 16, 1996, notification was issued including the solvent extraction plant in the negative list and on that basis, the petitioner w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....suant to or in furtherance of the promises or representations made by the State. The State accepted that equity operated in favour of the entrepreneurs by issuing Note 2 to the notification dated December 16, 1996 whereby and whereunder solvent extraction plant was for the first time inserted in Schedule III, i.e., in the negative list. Both the provisions contained in Schedule III and the Note 2 formed part of subordinate legislation. By reason of the said note, the State did not deviate from its professed object. It was in conformity with the purport for which original rule 28A was enacted. We, in this case, are not concerned with the quantum of exemption to which the appellants may be entitled to, but only with the interpretation o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rant of eligibility certificate to the extent of Rs. 94,48,911 for a period of nine years, i.e., from March 29, 1997 to March 28, 2006. The said amount has been calculated with reference to the investment made by the petitioner up to December 16, 1996. On appeal, the appellate authority affirmed the said view with the following observations: "... The Committee examined the judgment relied upon and observed that the honourable Supreme Court has not found fault with the amendment dated December 16, 1996 whereby the solvent extraction plant have been put into negative list (Schedule III). The effect of enlargement of the negative list is that the unit has ceased to be eligible for exemption/deferment with effect from December 16, 1996. Besi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or undertaking where the Central Government held 51 per cent or more shares; (III) is not availing incentive of interest-free loan from the Industries Department for investment after the April 1, 1988; (IV) (is not included in Schedule III appended to these Rules) [(V) is not availing or has availed incentive of exemption under section 13 of the Act]" Sub-rule (4)(a) deals with date of eligibility, which is as under: "(4)(a) Subject to other provisions of this rule, the benefit of tax exemption or deferment shall be given to an eligible industrial unit holding exemption or entitlement certificate, as the case may be to the extent, for the period, from year to year in various zones [from the date of commercial production or fr....