- (1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order dated 31.10.2006 (Annexure P-21), passed by Financial Commissioner (Taxation); order dated 22.5.2008 (Annexure P-20), passed by Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab and order dated 2.9.2013 (Annexure P-18), passed by Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for short, 'the Tribunal'). Vires of the note appended to Rule 4(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax (Deferment and Exemption) Rules, 1991 (for short, 'the Rules') has also been challenged. Further prayer in the alternative is to read down the provisions of Rule 3(2) of the Rules to mean that the benefit of exemption/deferment for payment of tax shall be available from the date of issuance of exemption/entitlement certificate.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of special and alloys steel for use in automobile and engineering industry. New rolling mill was set up by the petitioner. As per Punjab Package of Incentives, 1992, as notified on 28.9.1992, the petitioner was eligible to claim benefit of exemption from payment of sales tax for a period of 84 months, subject to a maximum of 150% of fixed capital investment. The unit came into production on 15.9.1993. The application was submitted for issuance of eligibility certificate and consequently the exemption certificate. The application remained pending and finally after a period of 6-1/2 years from the date of production that the eligibility certificate was issued on 3.3.2000. Thereafter, the exemption certificate was issued on 18.4.2000. The period of validity was from 15.9.1993 till 14.9.2000. Meaning thereby the period for which the petitioner could claim benefit of exemption was merely five months. As per Rule 3(2) of the Rules, the benefit is admissible to an eligible industrial unit only after the eligibility certificate is issued in its favour. Rule 4 of the Rules provides the period for which the benefit is admissible to an eligible industrial unit. Different periods and the amount of benefit have been provided for the units located in different areas. In the case of the petitioner, the benefit is admissible for a period of 84 months. The note appended to Rule 4 postulates that benefit is admissible from the date of production. While referring to the aforesaid provisions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is apparent discrepancy in the aforesaid rule, as an industrial unit cannot be granted eligibility certificate on the date of production. The process is bound to take some time. Once the benefit is to be granted only after the issuance of eligibility certificate, the period for which the benefit is granted also should have been from that date and not from the date of production.
(3.) He further submitted that in case of M/s Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., the period which was spent in issuing the eligibility certificate to the company, was extended so as to enable the company to avail of the admissible benefit. There is no specific reply to the contention raised by the petitioner in the writ petition regarding the case of M/s Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., being similar to the petitioner. The petitioner cannot be discriminated.;