El UH GE COURT OF JUDICATUEE AT BELASP mm wTlTmN No. W55 OF 20m Steel kuthority of india L1mited Bi iai Steel Plant,‘Bhilai District Durg, rapresented . Petitidner by Executive Director (Finance) —Versus— 1. Additional CommiSSioner, ommercial TaX, Raipur 2. Assistant Commissioner“ Commercial Tax, Durg. 3. State of ChhattiSgarh (Successor of State o Raipur. f Madhya Pradcsh) throggh Secretary, VanijyaKar Vibhag, Resgondents w" .4 I - .3gnu” i s..99 ' mugmmxd .A ... WRIT EETITEON UNDER AEEICLES 226 A§D,222 OF mm CONSTHUEON mi 1mg; \ C Wm w.:,(?:.»n§.-A.‘QT.$§~.L\&OOO WW WK 200 / Shri Ashish Shrivastava with Miss. Rupal Singh, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Gautam Bhaduri, Deputy Advocate General for the State. This order shall also dispose of W‘P.No.2521/2000, 153/2001, 155/2001 and 156/2001, as the matter iS identical. Petitioners “have :flled these writ petitions against the order dated 08.3.200 1 passed by the Additional Commissioner in Revision Challenging the levy of enuy tax @ 10% on Slow Silica Lime Stones and Hi 1 Silica Lime stones and other questions upheld in t ljevision by the Additional Commissioner. It is submi ed that on representations made by the petitioners, theSta Government has agreed to settle the dispute outside the co and on such settlement it was decided to reduce the rate 0 entry tax from 10‘V;to 6% subject to the condition that petitio ers withdraw the wimt\petitions. Accordingly, learned c tinsel for the petitioners want to withdraw these writ petitio s and pra that the matter be remitted back to thc i Additional Commissioner for reconsideration of other isues. The applications for the purpose have also been filedi Wed‘ éfav’i h y film x O Wamz‘a‘wm %mm 01.01.2004 XLHCQ: