y .-B. li, Petitioner Respondents HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Writ PetitionNo. 54S6 of 200S M/s Mahavir Iron & Steel Industries Through its Prop. SHri Anjani Goenka, RingRoadNo.2, Raipur (G.G.) Vs. 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary, Commercial Tax Department, Raipur 2. Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Raipur 3. AssistantCommissioner Commercial Tax Department, Raipur Petiiioner by Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate. Respondents by Shri N.K.Agrawal;Dy Advocate General. ORDER (Passed on.;3/11/05) The instant petition has been filed underArticle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India by the petitioner as he is aggrieved by the order dated 25.05.2005 passed by respondent No. 2 in revision against the order of assessment dated 28.11.1997 passed by'respondent No.3 as the same has been partly allovi&d and a part relaxation in imposition of tax as well as penalty has been granted.. . ^ 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner-a Smatl Scate Industry, is engaged in processing iron and steel scrap materials and selling the same to the consumers. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Chhattisgarh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 (in short 'the Act of 1994'). The petitioner was issued eligibility/exemption certificate on 04.09.2002 for a periodfrom 11.05.1990 to 23.12.1994 byDislrictTrade & Industries Centre, Raipur. The assessment of the petitioner's Industry was done by respondent No. 3 for theperiod 01.04.1994 to 31.03.1995 and accordingiy a total tax of Ra.53,76,066/- along with penalty under Section 17(3) of the -~ Act of 1994 was imposedvideorderdated^28.11.1997. •llliflll 111; !i' c //'.•-.^ The petitioner preferred reyision before respondent No.2 under..Section 62 of the Aet of 1994 on the ground that the assessment is bad, iliegal and arbitrary as the Company has been granted certificate of etigibility for exemption from sales tax vide order dated 04.09.2002 under the Act of 1994 for period from 11.05.1990 to 23.12.1994. Howevsr, the revision preferred by the petitioner has been partly allowed afterconsidering the eligibility certificate and extended the relaxatioh .to the tune of Rs.42,46,885/- towards payment of.sales tax and relaxation of Rs.10,61,870,'- towards imposition 'of penalty. The impugned order of Annexure P/5 passed by the respondent No.2 is arbitrary and illegal as the same tias been passed ignoring the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of AshHwad^Udvoa and others Vs. State Level Committee and others reported in (19891 32 VKN 65. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State/respondents submits that the petition is devoid of merits. He submits that taking into consideration the' iaw laid down 'in the matter of'Ashirwad Udyog and others (supra), certificate of eligibility for exemption 'of tax under M.P.General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and the General Sates Tax Act, 1956, was issued tothe petitioner vide document ofAnnexure P/2 on 04.09,2002. Theabove exemption was avai!abl& to the petitioner fbr a period commencjng from 11.05.1990' and ending with 23 day of December 1994. The revision preferred by the petitioner against the assessment for the assessment year corrimencing from 01.04.1994 to 31.03.1995 has been partly allowed and tax assessment done bythe assessing authorityfor^the periodfrom 11.05.1990 to 23.12.1994 and imposition ofpenalty on the aforesaid amount, has been held contrary to law and accordlngly relaxation of Rs. 42,46,885/- has been aceorded towards sales tax and penalty of Rs. 1Q,61,870/- under Section 17(3) of the Act of 1994, lias been redyced. Since the petitioner was not entltled for any exemption for the peripd commencing from 24.12.1994 to 31.03.1995, therefore, no relaxatioh was granted t6 the petitioner for the transaction betweenthe above period. have heard learned counsel forthe parties. ^ From perusal of the order of respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax of Annexure P/3 and impugned order of Annexure P/5 passed in revision by respondent No.2-Additionai Commis^ioner, Commercial Tax, it appears that the assessment was done by not treating re-processing of iron industry as process of manufacture and thereby it was held that the petitioner's Industry was not etigible for exemption. However, eligibility certificate vras issued to the petitloner in the light of thejudgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter ofAshirwad Udyog and others (supra) and in the light ofthe certificate ofAnnexure P/2, the revisional authority by the Order of Annexure P/5 has extended relaxation and imposition of commercial tax under Section 1 7(3) of the Act of 1 994. Thus in ail a total relaxation of Rs. 42,46,885/-towardsimposition oftax and Rs.10,61,870/- towards penalty has been accorded. it is not disputed that the petitioner wasnot eligible for any exemptionafter 24.12.1994 since the assessm.ent pertains to period from 01.04;1993 to 31.03.1995, therefore the petitioner was not eiigible for any exemption for the period from'24.12.1994 to 31.03.1995. Thus, thecontention of the petitionerthat hevras eligiblefor exemption as perjudgment ofthe Hon'bie Apex Court which has npt been accorded to him, is without any substance as the certificate of eligibility has been given to the petitioher as per the judgment of the Hon'bte Apex Court and as per eligibility certificate of Annexure P/2, relaxation and imposition oftax has already been extended to the petitioner. 8. As a result, the instant petition is dismissed. Sd/- / DhirendraMishra Judge ifit^"-