IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2008 / 5TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 22517 of 2003(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S. DEEPA PLASTICS AND POLYMERS PARAPPUKARA, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. N. BHASKARAN. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, THRISSUR. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIS AND COMMERCE, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. TEK CHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE VALUATION CERTIFICATE DATED 21.6.1997 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. A5/37/2002 DATED 19.1.2002 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. FC3/15537/02/K.DIS. DATED 2.6.2003 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. 1ST RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE SALES TAX EXEMPTION ORDER DATED 9.6.2004 TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 22517 OF 200 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader. The order under challenge is Ext.P3 issued declining sales tax exemption on additional investment under Expansion Scheme. The petitioner's case is that petitioner has claimed the benefit of exemption on addl. investment under Modernisation Scheme under SRO 1729 of 1993. Exemption is seen considered and disallowed vide Ext.P3 on the basis that petitioner's application for exemption was under Expansion scheme. Since petitioner has now put forward a case that the petitioner's claim was under Modernisation scheme, which does not require any increase in installed capacity, I set aisde Ext.P3 and remand the case back to Chairman, District Industries Centre for reference to District Level Committee and for decision by them. There will be direction to the District Level Committee to take a decision afresh after hearing the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a copy of 2 this judgment before the District Level Committee for compliance. It is seen that in the application the date of commencement of commercial production is given as 15.4.1986. It is not known whether this date is correct and if so petitioner is covered by the notification under which exemption for addl. investment was claimed. The District Level Committee should consider this while considering the application afresh. W.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3