GUWAHATI, India, Nov. 24 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Oct. 24:
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging inter alia an order of assessment dated 21.08.2013 passed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-B, Guwahati and the subsequent order dated December, 2014 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Taxes Guwahati whereby the revision petition of the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner is an exempted Unit under the Industrial and Investment Policy of Assam, 2008 (hereinafter referred to the Policy of 2008). Under the said Policy, the petitioner was to get tax benefit, both under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Pursuant to the said Policy, the Finance Department of the Government of Assam had issued a notification dated 03.11.2009 and as per Clause 3(3), the petitioner is to get the benefit of such exemption. Vide a communication dated 20.09.2010, the petitioner was granted the Eligibility Certificate for claiming incentives under Industrial Policy of Assam, 2008 and for claiming exemption of tax under the Assam Industries (Tax Exemption) Scheme, 2009. The date of commencement of commercial production was stated to be 26.08.2009. Under Serial No. 9 of the Eligibility Certificate, the petitioner was to get exemption for a period of 7 years starting from 26.06.2009 to 25.06.2016 for Rs.687.54 lacs. Pursuant thereto, a Certificate of Entitlement was also granted to the petitioner for the aforesaid period. The dispute however is with regard to the period ending 2010-11 when the petitioner had filed for exemption and vide the impugned assessment order dated 21.08.2013 such exemption was rejected. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner had filed revision petition which was also rejected, vide the order passed in December, 2014 as indicated above. It is these actions which are the subject matter of challenge in this present writ petition.
3. I have heard Ms. N. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department.
4. Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 more particularly, Section 8 thereof. By drawing the attention of this Court to Section 8(1), learned counsel has submitted that under the said provision, there is a requirement for payment of tax in case of inter-state trade or commerce with a provision that the Central Government may reduce the rate. Under Section 8(4), there is a requirement to submit a C form in the form of a declaration and under Section 8(5), the Unit is entitled for the tax benefit to be given by the State Government on fulfillment of the requirements of Section 8(4). It is the case of the petitioner that certain C forms were not being able to be submitted. However, the learned counsel has submitted that even if a Unit is not able to deposit the C forms, then also such Unit would be entitled for the exemption as per the Policy in question. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent authorities cannot go beyond the views of the Assessing Officer who had in fact recommended for such exemption. It is also submitted that the Unit cannot be deprived of the entitlement under the Policy only because of the fact that the Unit had not asked for such rebate. She submits that Section 8(2) is also liable to be considered in which case the petitioner would be entitled to get the benefit.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=7yg5D%2FmJmLJFbv9l4Wl3vaX10lvVRMvGExjucOFVrEbOAZV7RinPpA7XNk%2B0pBiQ&caseno=WP(C)/6760/2016&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010029322016&state_code=6&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
