Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2010 (3) TMI 1027

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r interest-free sales tax deferral in respect of the expanded unit by making additional investment of Rs. 45.49 lakhs. The TIIC accordingly issued the eligibility certificate dated February 19, 1999 as per which, the deferral was to cover the period 1998 to 2007 repayable from the year 2007 to 2016. In terms of the eligibility certificate, the petitioner also entered into an agreement with the territorial Assistant Commissioner for the said deferral. The petitioner states that neither the eligibility certificate nor the agreement stipulated that the benefit of deferral for the expanded unit would be over and above the base volume of production in the parent unit. Accordingly, the petitioner filed the returns and claimed the deferral as p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the petitioner should maintain the base volume of production/sales, the insistence on compliance with the said conditions by the first respondent is totally illegal and unsustainable. The learned counsel took me through the various clauses in the eligi bility certificate and submitted that the demand for interest is liable to be set aside.   A perusal of the impugned notice shows that the demand for payment enal interest was made on the premise that the petitioner had remitted the tax belatedly for the assessment years 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. As seen from the documents produced before this court, the petitioner had the benefit of deferral first as a new unit from the year 1992 for a period of nine years and the repaym....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....007-08 to 2015-16. The agreement also fixed the monetary ceiling on the deferral at Rs. 36.39 lakhs of actual sales tax payable by the dealer. The agreement further states that the company is eligible for deferral of sales tax for the increased volume of production. For the purpose of determining the increased volume of production, the base figure shall be the highest of the volume of production or sales in the company in any one of the years during the last nine year period preceding the date of commencement of deferral. In the face of the said agreement, the notice dated January 9, 2001 stated that since the petitioner had not reached the base volume of production for the year 1997-98, the eligibility was rejected. Hence the petitioner wa....