LexM/S. PINE CHEMICALS LTD. AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
MIS. PINE CHEMICALS LTD. AND ORS. ETC. ETC. A v. THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY AND ORS. ETC. ETC. JANUARY 16, 1992 [S. RANGANATHAN, V. RAMASWAMI AND N.D. OJHA, JJ.] B Interpretation of Statutes----heeming provisio,,__.construction (Section 5, Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962). Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962--Section 5- Granting tax exemption--l'rocedure-Whether Government Orders 159 and C 414 deemed to be exemption notification-Tax exemptio!>-Kinds of-- Person claims exemptiol>-Duty of Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tox Act, 1962--Section 5-Tax exemption by Govt. Orders 159 and 4l~"Will be granted exemption" and "will be exempted"-Meaning-Whether same. D . Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962--Section 5- Government Order 159 dated 26.3.1971, whether a follow up action of Gov- ernment to its notification in SRO 214 dated 3.6.1971 issued under section 23 of the Jammu and Kashmir Urban Immovable Property Tax Act, 1962. Claim ~f Period of exemption for JO years on the ground of promis- sory estoppel-Reference to JO years in Finance Minister's speech and the Brochure dated 7.9.1978-Whether benefit under Govt. Orders 159 and 414 continues for 10 years. E Exemption-hether Govt. Orders 159 and 414 superseded by SRO 195 F dated 31.3.1978-Taxability of Vanaspati and edible oils under notification SRO 448 da!ed 22.10.1982. Section 4(1)--Scheme of-Levy of single point taxation-Tax examp- tion under Govt. Orders 159 and 414 whether covers entire series of sales G of the goods manufactured-Applicability of notification SRO 448. Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 : Sections 6(1), 6(1-A), 15,8 (2-A}-Tax liability under-Inter State sale-When takes place-Imposition of tax on sale of declared goods by H 179 180 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1992] 1 S. C.R. A State under State Law in inter state sale-CST if paid. to be reimbursed - Over-riding effect of section 8(2-A}-Scope of-Applicability of Section 6(1-A). Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962 : B Section 5---<Jovt. Orders 159 and 414-Benefits under-Facts to be proved by dealer-I mention of. Govt. Orders 159 and 414-Whether superseded by SRO 80182. Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962-Section BB- C Application of. CA. No. 230911989 "fhe appellant-a public limited company-was manufacturing Rosin, Turpentine and Rosin Derivatives and was carrying on business D at Bari Brahmana and Jammu Tawi. On 20.1.1981, the Assessing Authority assessed the appellant-com- pany under the Central Sales Tax Act, for the year ending 30.6.80. On 22.2.1981 an assessment order under section 10 of the Act was E made. A penalty order was also made. The appellants challenged the order of the Assessing Authority before the High Court filing,iWritPetition No. 87 of 1987, contending that they were exempt from payment or sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and the Jammu & Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, F 1962, on the finished goods produced by them for a period of five years commencing from 8th November, 1979, in terms of the Government Orders No. 159-Ind. dated 26.3.1971 as amended by Government Order No.414-lnd. dated 25th August, 1971 read with Section 8(2A) or the Central Sales Tax Act; that the Government represented and an- G nounced a package or incentives for large and medium scale industries grant or exemption from sales tax both on the raw materials purchased by the industries and the sale of their finished products; and that the Government was estopped from charging sales tax. The High Court dismissed the Writ ·Petition holding that the two H Government Orders were only declarations of an intention to exempt PINE CHEMICALS v. ASSESSING AUTHORITY 181 from payment of sales tax and that they were not exemption notinca- A lions under section 5 of the General Sales Tax Act and that the appellants failed to prove the factual foundation for invoking the principle of promissory estoppel. Against the High Court's decision by special leave C.A.No. 2309 .of 1989 was filed by the appellant-company. B CANo. 2310 of 1989 The appellant-company had filed a miscellaneous petition, after the judgment in the W.P.No. 87 of 1987 (the writ petition of the High Court against which C.A.No.2309 of 1989 was filed) for permission to C file reply affidavit on the ground of that the documents produced at the time of hearing needed explanation. The High Court dismissed the Misc. Petition as it was belated and
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.