Jainendra Kumar Ranka , J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -assessee, under section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated February 2, 2005 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (in short, "the Board") in Appeal No. 1306/2003. This revision petition was admitted by this court on April 3, 2007 on the following substantial questions of law: (1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by respondent No. 1 refusing to allow the benefit of unavailed benefit of exemption at the new premises is a correct interpretation of law and scheme? (2) Whether in the facts and circumstances and on correct interpretation of the Scheme the applicant is entitled for the benefit for unavailed tax at the shifted premises? (3) Whether the notification dated March 24, 2005 prescribing the procedure for claiming the unavailed benefit of tax is retrospective in nature? and (4) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Rajasthan Tax Board was justified in holding that as per clause 3(3) benefit cannot be given to unit at shifted premises?.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case as emerging on the face of record is that the petitioner is a private limited company and established a new industry at Norangpura, Tehsil, Sambhar District, Jaipur and was granted eligibility certificate under the New Incentive Scheme, 1989 for sales tax exemption from June 24, 1996 to June 23, 2003, i.e., for a period of seven years. The petitioner was to make fixed capital investment to the tune of Rs. 90.72 lac and accordingly, the petitioner complied with the directives. Subsequently, on account of defective supply of the main plant power connection from rural feeder, non -availability of skilled labourers and lack of infrastructure facility, the unit could not run smoothly and on the contrary, could not produce the desired material and suffered heavy losses and burden on account of interest. It also got irregular power supply and accordingly this unit was declared as sick unit by the District Industries Center, Jaipur, on March 26, 2002 with effect from April 1, 1998. Finding no alternative, the petitioner moved an application for revival of the sick unit and also moved an application simultaneously to shift the industrial unit from village Norangpura, Tehsil, Sambhar District, Jaipur to B -228 Route No. 9, VKIA Jaipur. The petitioner was directed to obtain NOC from RIICO and also from other authorities and finally the RIICO granted permission to the petitioner to shift the unit on October 29, 2002. The petitioner thereafter, moved another application to the General Manager, District Industries Center, Jaipur and State Level Screening Committee for availing of the incentive granted earlier under sales tax for the balance period and mentioned the facts reiterated before the various authorities. However, the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the District Level Screening Committee in this regard vide order dated March 6, 2003.
(3.) A review petition was also filed by the petitioner before the District Level Screening Committee, reiterating the facts and also submitted the facts that as there was no change in the name and title of the company or in the management, and all directors remained the same, no change of address of the registered company and only location of the sick unit has been changed to rehabilitate it. It was further submitted that plants and machineries have been shifted to the VKIA Jaipur itself, the unit was financed by the RIICO and RIICO also granted permission to shift it, in the facts and circumstances of the case. Not only RIICO but also other Departments, namely, the Excise Department and other authorities were pleased to accept the proposition of the petitioner, it was further submitted that there would be no loss to the Government or Sales Tax Department by shifting the industries from Sambhar to Jaipur. On the contrary, it would be better to run it at Jaipur with all infrastructure available including the skilled labourers, etc. It was also submitted that by shifting it to Jaipur, Government and Sales Tax Department and other Departments would be gainer in the long term. However, the review petition was also rejected by the committee vide order dated May 28, 2003.;