LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. versus M/S PUNJAB SPINTEX LTD.

Citation: [2024] 7 S.C.R. 745 · Decided: 15-07-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Case Allowed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 7 S.C.R. 745 : 2024 INSC 526
State of Punjab & Ors. 
v. 
M/s Punjab Spintex Ltd.
(Civil Appeal No. 10970-10971 of 2014)
15 July 2024
[Vikram Nath* and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the exemption from payment of Market Fee, granted under 
the Industrial Policy, 2003, of the Punjab Government, can be said 
to include exemption from Rural Development Fee.
Headnotes†
Market Fees – Scope of Exemption in relation to fees collected 
under two different statutes – Explained: 
Held: The preamble of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets 
Act, 1961, which governs the collection of market Fee, clearly 
stipulates that it is a statute to provide for law relating to better 
regulation of purchase, sale, storage and processing of agricultural 
produce and for establishment of markets in the State – Whereas, 
the Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987, which governs the 
collection of Rural Development Fee, on the other hand, is 
enacted for providing relief for the loss of agricultural produce, 
accelerating rural development, improve facilities for purchasers 
of agricultural produce and augment agricultural production – It 
is not uncommon for different statutes, concerning similar area of 
law, to have convergence of interests to some degree – However, 
this would not imply that benefits extended to one statute will be 
presumed to flow to the other statute as well – The 2003 Policy 
does not specifically exempt Rural Development fees – Any 
contrary interpretation would considerably broaden the canvas 
of the incentives available under the 2003 Policy, which was 
never intended – The interpretation that exemption from Market 
fees is inclusive of Rural Development fees shall be contrary to 
the statutory provisions and objective behind both the Acts as 
well as the 2003 Policy – Hence, the Market Fee and the Rural 
Development Fee cannot be equated or assumed to be same or 
similar for the purposes of exemption. [Paras 20 to 24]
* Author
746
[2024] 7 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
List of Acts
Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961; Punjab Rural 
Development Act, 1987.
List of Keywords
Market Fee; Rural Development Fee.
Case Arising From
CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 10970-10971 
of 2014
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.01.2010 and 24.09.2010 
in CM No. 3144 of 2010 and CWP No. 14847 of 2009 of the High 
Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Appearances for Parties
Gurminder Singh AG/Sr. Adv., Vivek Jain, D.A.G., Karan Sharma, 
Advs. for the Appellants.
Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv., Sachin Jain, Ms. Snehil Sonam, Rajiv Ranjan 
Dwivedi, Sachin Pahwa, Advs. for the Respondent.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Vikram Nath, J.
1.	
These appeals, by special leave, assail the correctness of the 
judgment and orders dated 27.01.2010 and 24.09.2010 passed by 
the Punjab & Haryana High Court, respectively in Civil W.P. No. 
14847 of 2009 and C.M. No. 3144 of 2010 in the Writ Petition.
2.	
The matter pertains to exemption from payment of Market fee and 
Rural Development fee sought by the Respondent herein. The 
Respondent company was incorporated on 26.12.2006 and set up 
a spinning unit at Bathinda for manufacturing cotton yarn out of raw 
cotton. Thereafter, the Respondent company applied to the Appellant 
for grant of exemption from paying Market fee and Rural Development 
fee in terms of the Industrial Policy, 20031 and claimed to be similarly 
1	
2003 Policy, hereinafter
[2024] 7 S.C.R. 
747
State of Punjab & Ors. v. M/s Punjab Spintex Ltd.
situated as M/s Partap Furane Pvt. Ltd., which is also engaged in 
the manufacturing of cotton yarn, and was granted exemption from 
payment of Market fee. 
3.	
Respondent filed Civil W.P. No. 14847 of 2009 before the High 
Court of Punjab & Haryana seeking such exemption. Therein, in 
response to the notice issued, the Counsel for the State produced 
the minutes of meetings of the Empowered Committee held under 
the Chairmanship of the Chief Minister, Punjab, on 17.12.2009, which 
has been reproduced as follows:
"i).	
Integrated Cotton Ginning and Spinning Units which 
have not sought the status of Mega Projects would 
be eligible for incentives under the Industrial Policy, 
2003, including exemption from payment of market 
fee as per Para 11.4.2(i). This would be for a period 
of ten years from the date of issue of the notification.
a. Units that have availed of the benefit under the 
Mega Projects Scheme but h

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