- (1.) THIS application has been filed by the petitioner for modification/clarification of the order dated May 10, 2002 (Tin Plate Company of India Limited v. State of Bihar [2004] 135 STC 385) passed by this Court in C. W. J. C. No. 2857 of 2000 (R) and the petitioner by the said modification/clarification desires the addition of the words "and other cold rolled products" after the word "tmbp" in the last but one line in para 13 at page 23 of the judgment. For the sake of clarity I quote the relevant sentences appearing in para 13 at page 23 of the judgment : ". . . . . . . . Based upon the facts aforesaid and the interpretation of clause (15. 4) of S. O. No. 478 read with clause (Ga) of S. O. No. 57 dated March 2, 2000 the petitioner is entitled to full exemption in respect of the sales tax paid on the purchase of the raw materials, i. e. , HR coils for the production of the new product, i. e. , TMBP which was not earlier produced in the unit of the petitioner for manufacture of ETP. "
(2.) THE petitioner had earlier filed C. W. J. C. No. 2857 of 2000 (R) for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the orders dated June 30, 2000 (annexure 16) and July 1, 2000 (annexure 17) passed by respondent No. 3, Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Admn.), Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur, pursuant to the direction dated January 6, 2000 passed by this Court in C. W. J. C. No. 3248 of 1999 (R) whereby and whereunder the prayer of the petitioner for refund of the amount of sales tax of the year 1996-97 has been disallowed and for the year 1997-98 the petitioner was allowed to avail of the tax-free purchase of raw materials in the form of HR coils for the production of 8588 MT of CRM product over and above the 2/3rd incremental capacity of 60,000 MT fixed under S. O. No. 478 on proportional basis which works out to 9889 MT only and also a direction was made therein that the refund of the tax paid on purchase of raw materials during the period of exemption has to be routed through the seller company, i. e. , TISCO for the refund of the amount of the tax to the dealer company. After hearing the parties at length the writ application of the petitioner-dealer company was allowed vide judgment dated May 10, 2002 (Tin Plate Company of India Limited v. State of Bihar [2004] 135 STC 385 (Jharkh.)) with the following directions contained in para 15 of the judgment aforesaid which is as follows : " 15. Respondent No. 3 (JCCT) is hereby directed to consider the claim of refund of the petitioner afresh within four weeks from the date of this order confining himself only within the specific direction given by the earlier division Bench of this Court on January 6, 2000. Respondent No. 3 (JCCT) will satisfy himself that the amount of sales tax on the purchase of raw materials have been paid by the petitioner to TISCO and others and he should also be satisfied that TISCO and SAIL have paid the amount to the State Government and on being satisfied in view of the materials already before him, supplied by the petitioner and TISCO, respondent No. 3 will pass speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law for the refund of the amount of sales tax paid on the purchase of raw materials from April 5, 1996 to March 31, 1998 in terms of the direction of earlier division Bench dated January 6, 2000. No order as to costs. " In pursuance of the direction of this Court quoted above the petitioner moved before J. C. C. Taxes (Admn.), Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur, for the refund of the sales tax paid regarding the purchase of the raw materials, i. e. , HR coils which was allowed in full vide annexure 3 of this petition and a copy of annexure 3 was forwarded to the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Dept. , Jharkhand, Ranchi, besides others for information and necessary action. Thereupon the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi, issued notice under section 46 (4) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 to the petitioner for hearing under section 46 (4) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 in his court at Ranchi. For proper appreciation relevant portion of the said notice is quoted below : " The honourable High Court of Jharkhand vide its order dated May 10, 2002 in C. W. J. C. No. 2857 of 2000 (R) has held (the order) that - '. . . . . . Based upon the facts aforesaid and the interpretation of clause (15. 4) of S. O. No. 478 read with clause (Ga) of S. O. No. 57 dated March 2, 2000 the petitioner is entitled to full exemption in respect of the sales tax paid on the purchase of raw materials, i. e. , HR coils for the production of the new product, i. e. , TMBP which was not earlier produced in the unit of the petitioner for manufacture of ETP. . . . . . . '
(3.) BUT it is seen from the refund order dated August 10, 2002 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Admn.), Jamshedpur, and other related records that he has passed the refund order taking the view that all cold rolled products come under TMBP. This needs to be looked into. " In the said situation the petitioner has once again come before this Court by filing this application for modification/clarification of the order dated May 10, 2002 (Tin Plate Company of India Limited v. State of Bihar [2004] 135 STC 385) passed in C. W. J. C. No. 2857 of 2000 (R ). The petitioner has stated in the modification petition that from the perusal of the entire judgment it appears that this Court has been pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled to exemption on the entire raw materials and not only for the manufacture of TMBP and in para 13 of the said judgment only the word TMBP has been used and the words "and other cold rolled products like FHCR" has been inadvertently left out. It is also stated that from a proper reading of the tenor and the purport of the judgment of this Court it will appear that the judgment has proceeded on the basis of the petitioner's contention that the raw materials, viz. , HR coils, are required for the manufacture of TMBP and other cold rolled products including FHCR, CRGC and CRGP and the entire raw materials, viz. , HR coils purchased from TISCO and SAIL for the period from April 5, 1996 to March 31, 1998 have been used for the purpose of manufacturing new products, viz. , TMBP and other cold rolled products including FHCR, CRGC and CRGP. It has further been stated that it has been held in the said judgment by this Bench categorically that the petitioner came into commercial production with effect from April 5, 1996 which stands testified by the Director, Technical Department and the petitioner out of the raw materials of 1,20,000 MT has used 90,000 MT for the production of TMBP and the balance 30,000 MT has been used for manufacture of other cold rolled products, viz. , FHCR, CRGC and CRGP. The further case of the petitioner is that contention of the petitioner has been accepted in the said judgment that the manufacture of TMBP and other cold rolled products are new products for which the raw materials, i. e. , HR coils purchased from April 5, 1996 to March 31, 1998 has been used and because of this factual finding this Court has categorically directed that the purchase of the raw materials, viz. , HR coils during the period from April 5, 1996 to March 31, 1998 which has been used for the manufacture of new products, i. e. , TMBP and other cold rolled products including FHCR and others are to be granted full exemption in terms of the Industrial Policy provided the authorities are satisfied that the sales tax has been paid on the purchase of the said raw materials to TISCO and SAIL and the sales tax had been paid by TISCO and SAIL to the sales tax authorities. The further case of the petitioner is that it is only by way of an inadvertent omission and/or a typographical omission that this Court in one place has observed that the sales tax on the purchase of raw materials, i. e. , HR coils on the manufacture of the new product TMBP is to be allowed exemption whereas in the proper context of the entire judgment this Court really intended and meant that the sales tax paid on the entire raw materials, i. e. , HR coils purchased from April 5, 1996 to March 31, 1998 and which have been used for the manufacture of new product, viz. , TMBP and other cold rolled products are to be granted exemption and in the facts and circumstances of this case the observation made by this Court in para 13, viz. , "the petitioner is entitled to full exemption in respect of the sales tax paid on the purchase of raw materials, i. e. , HR coils for the production of new product, i. e. , TMBP which was not earlier produced in the unit of the petitioner for manufacturing ETP" may be suitably amended so as to include after the words "for the production of the new products, i. e. , TMBP and other CR products including FHCR, CRGC and CRGP" which were not earlier produced in the unit of the petitioner in order that the true purport and intent of the judgment may be properly reflected.;