IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2009 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1931 WA.No. 927 of 2007() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18148/2006 Dated 12/01/2007 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- M/S.CONTRUST SUPER DESIGNER TILES PRIVATE LIMITED,OLAVAKKODE,PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,T.VENUGOPAL. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER,DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE,PALAKKAD. 2. STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR SALES TAX EXEMPTION,REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), SPECIAL CIRCLE,KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ; THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W. A. No. 927 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel for the appellant and the Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Appeal is against the judgment of the learned single Judge declining to interfere in the matter on account of inordinate delay in filing the Writ Petition. We do not think delay will defeat the appellant's case because appellant as a SSI unit was declined sales tax exemption on the investment in building for the reason that the land taken on lease by it was not under a registered deed. However, counsel for the appellant submitted that lessor is none other than the promoter of the appellant-company and the appellant itself is a joint venture between the lessor and lessee. Even though lease was not registered as on the date of commencement of commercial production, later it was registered on 7.4.2000. Sales tax exemption is for a period of seven years commencing from June, 1999 onwards. We do not 2 think exemption would be declined on a technical ground like this because admittedly notification entitles an industry for exemption on the value of investment made in the form of construction. Delay in filing the Writ Petition is nine months from the date of service of order. We are told that exemption was claimed on the value of building all through and appellant has not collected tax. We feel appellant cannot be declined exemption on account of technical ground like this, that is registration of lease deed with some delay. We therefore allow the appeal by reversing the judgment of the learned single Judge and allow the WPC by setting aside Exts. P2, P3 and P5 orders with direction to the first respondent to issue fresh certificate of exemption including the value of building constructed on leased land. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) Judge. kk 3