- (1.) Matter has come up for orders on the application submitted by the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the respondent-State and the application submitted by the petitioner on April 7, 2011 seeking amendment to the writ petition. The writ petition has not been admitted so far. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following prayers: It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this honourable court may kindly be pleased to accept and allow the writ petition of the petitioner and by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof-- (i) the order dated October 21, 2000/November 20, 2000 (annexure 11 (Colly.) passed by the SLSC, the letter of SLSC dated February 8, 2007 (annexure 13) and demand notice dated May 19, 2008/May 14, 2008 (annexure 15A Colly) be declared to be wrong, arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and be quashed and set aside; (ii) the application dated December 13, 2000 (annexure 12) submitted by the petitioner-company to the SLSC for review/ reconsideration of its decision and enhancement of EFCI of petitioner-company to the extent of Rs. 396-72 crores, be declared to have been deemed to have been accepted by SLSC from the expiry of stipulated period of 90 days from the date of filing thereof on December 13, 2000; (iii) the petitioner-company be held to be entitled to EFCI to the extent of Rs. 396.72 crores under the Incentive Scheme; (iv) alternatively, the matter be remanded to the SLSC for consideration/reconsideration of petitioner-company's application dated December 13, 2000 for enhancement of EFCI to the extent of Rs. 396.72 crores and meanwhile the petitioner-company be allowed to continue to avail of incentive of 75 per cent under the deferment scheme and the respondent' be restrained from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner-company for recovery of disputed amount of tax of Rs. 116.25 crores; (v) if any notice is issued or order is passed or any demand is raised in the matter against the petitioner-company after filing of the present writ petition, the same be taken on record and be quashed and set aside; (vi) any other order or direction which this honourable court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents; and (vii) award cost of this writ petition to the petitioner.
(3.) On behalf of the respondents, an application has been filed for vacation of interim order dated July 1, 2008 and for disposing of the writ petition as having become infructuous in view of the subsequent order passed by the respondents on April 29, 2011, by which the petitioner has been communicated that the decision with reference to his alleged review petition dated December 13, 2000. The order dated April 29, 2011 reads as follows:;