2016 (3) TMI 791

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CST amounts paid by the petitioner for the period covered by the Interest Free Sales Tax Deferral Scheme as per Government Order in G.O.Ms.26 - Industries (IT) Department dated 03.02.2011. 2.1 It is the case of the petitioner that they are engaged in the manufacturing of writing and printing paper. The Government of Tamil Nadu, approved a scheme known as Interest Free Sales Tax Deferral Scheme for encouraging the manufacturing company situate in a remote place as an incentive. According to the petitioner, they are eligible and continues to be eligible for the  Sales Tax Deferral Scheme as per the Government Order in G.O.Ms.26, Industries (IT) Department dated 03.02.2011. The petitioner was granted the deferral period from 01.02.1995 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this Court directed the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Commercial Tax Department to implement the order of the BIFR. By order dated 03.02.2011, the Government of Tamil Nadu, in G.O.Ms.26, Industries (IT) Department dated 03.02.2011, had passed an order granting time for utilization of unutilized Interest Free Sales Tax Loan of Rs. 594.95 lakhs upto 31.03.2014 and Interest Free Sales Tax Loan sanctioned was rescheduled by 9 years from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2014 so as to be payable over a period of 7 years starting from 01.04.2014. By proceedings dated 16.05.2011, the State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited, had revised the schedule pursuant to the orders of the Government of Tamil Nadu. 2.4 In the meantime, before resch....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the interest free sales tax loan sanctioned to the petitioner by 9 years from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2014, so as to be payable over a period of 7 years starting from April 2014, contrary to the said Government order, the respondent had rejected the request of the petitioner to refund a sum of Rs. 34,48,319/-. 4. Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent fairly submitted that the petitioner is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 34,48,319/-, however, instead of getting refund of the said amount, the respondent may be directed to adjust the said amount towards the existing dues of the sales tax payable by the petitioner, in accordance with law. Further, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitt....