M/S G.P. CERAMICS PVT. LTD. versus COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, UP.

Citation: [2008] 16 S.C.R. 315 · Decided: 19-11-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 16 S.c.R.·315 
M/S. G.P. CERAMICS PVT. LTD. 
A 
II. 
COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, UP. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6709 of 2008) 
NOVEMBER 19, 2008 
8 
t 
[S.B. SINHA AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] 
U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948; Ss. 4A and Exemption 
Notification: 
c 
Trade Tax - Exemption from payment to new Unit -
Effective date - Held: In terms of provisions under s.4A of 
the Act, exemption from payment of tax has to be granted in 
favour of new unit on the basis of eligibility certificates - In 
. _ case, the Unit fails to furnish additional information within 
D 
the prescribed time, the date on which such application 
"-. 
completed/additional information furnished shall be treated 
as date of application of such Unit in terms of r.25(1)(c) of 
the Rules - The said Rule has to be read with s.4-a of the 
Act - Execution' of a Deed of Lease may be a condition for E 
grant of allotment but the grant is not subject to the date of 
lease or period specified therein - Since the assessee had 
fulfilled the eligibility criteria for grant of exemption on 
24.10.1992, it had acquired a right to grant exemption from 
the same date - Under the circumstances, the assessee 
F 
+.-
should not have been deprived from availing the benefit of 
the Notification. 
U.P. Trade Tax Rules; r.25 - Grant of eligibility certificate. 
The question which arose for determination in this 
G 
Civil Appeal was as to whether an industrial Unit set up 
~ 
on the plot of land allotted by the State Industrial 
Development Corporation was entitled to get exemption 
from payment of trade tax from the date of sale of the 
315 
H 
316 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008) 16 S.C.R. 
~
A finished product manufactured by it as held by the 
f-
authority or from the date of grant of eligibility certificate 
by the authorities concerned as claimed by the assessee. 
Appellant-assessee contended that the High Court 
B has failed to construe the provisions of the UP Trade Tax 
Act and the Rules framed thereunder as also the form in 
which the application for exemption is required to be filed 
in their proper perspective as in terms thereof there was 
~ 
no necessity to supply a copy of the deed of lease; and 
c that the appellant could not file the lease deed within the 
stipulated period as the lease deed was lying with UP 
State Industrial Development Corporation which is owned 
by the State Gover1.1ment, and, therefore, the authorities 
must be held to have acted arbitrarily in reducing the 
D 
period of exemption from ten years to eight years. 
Respondent-authority submitted that from a bare 
perusal of the provisions of the Act as also the Rules, it 
would be evident that when an allotment is followed by 
...... 
a lease for a period of more than five years, it is incumbent 
E for the applicant to supply a copy thereof, failing which 
the application would be treated to be incomplete, the 
consequence whereof is that eligibility certificate could 
be granted only from the date when the application 
became complete in all respects and not from a date prior 
F thereto. 
_.. 
,,.,., 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
~ ~ 
HELD: 1.1. The grant of exemption from payment of 
trade ta~ for the s·pecified period in favour of owner of a 
G new unit was to be granted on the basis of the eligibility 
certificate. An eligibility certificate was granted jn favour 
of the appellant by the authorities for the period 16.4.1994 + 
to 23.10.2002 by an order dated 21.8 .. 1995, inter alia, on· 
~ 
the premise that a copy of the deed of lease.was.filed by 
H the appellant only on 16.4.1994. [Para 16] (329-D-E] 
G.P. CERAMICS PVT. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER, TRADE 317 
TAX, UP. 
1.2. The fact that the appellant was entitled to grant A 
of exemption is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute 
that a statutory corporation has allotted a land in its favo1:.1r 
on which the unit was started. It is furthermore not in 
dispute that the first sale from the said unit had taken 
place on 24.10.1992 and application in the prescribed form B 
has been filed on 12.3.1993, i.e., within a period of six 
>--
months therefrom. [Para 21] [331-C-D] 
1.3. Section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act does not 
provide for any procedure for filing of an application. The c 
procedures are laid down in the Rules. For the purpose 
of grant of eligibility certificate, the conditions attached 
thereto, inter alia, are that an application must be filed in 
the prescribed form. [Para 22] [331-E-F] 
1.4. The power of the General Manager to 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.