IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 8581 of 2007(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S MALABAR FRUIT PRODUCTS CO., M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, KUNCHAN THOMAS BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR SALES TAX EXEMPTION, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER(ASSMT) COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPL.CIRCLE III, ERNAKULAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.SAJAN JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 8581/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.13.1.2001. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.15.1.2002. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.7.2.2006. P4. COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DTD.29.5.2006. P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.18.12.2000. P6. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.26.12.2006. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 8581 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 11th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a partnership firm running a SSI unit. According to the petitioner, the petitioner undertook expansion of the unit during the period from 27.3.1999 to 7.11.2000. The petitioner applied for exemption from payment of sales tax in accordance with SRO No.1729/1993, for ` 16,96,236.20. But the District Level Committee, who considered the claim in the first instance granted exemption only to the tune of ` 13,01,457/-. Exemption to the tune of ` 3,91,700/- was rejected as relating to a goods vehicle purchased. The petitioner challenged the said order before the State Level Committee in appeal. The State Level Committee passed Ext.P3 order rejecting the appeal on the ground that as per the purchase bill, the vehicle was purchased on 27.3.2000, which is before the expansion period and, therefore, the petitioner is not eligible for exemption in respect thereof. The petitioner filed a review petition, which was also rejected by Ext.P6 order. Those are under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs; “i). to issue a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 and P6 orders passed by the 2nd respondent. ii). to declare that the petitioner is eligible for exemption on the investment made on goods vehicle during the expansion as per SRO 1729/93 and direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to allow exemption for the investment made on goods vehicle during expansion.” w.p.c.8581/07 2 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am of opinion that the authorities have not considered the matter in its correct perspective. Ext.P1 is the application for tax exemption filed by the petitioner. In the same, the date of commencement of commercial production is given as 7.11.2000. The question as to whether what is the expansion period is a fact in respect of which, specific findings have to be entered. I do not find any specific findings in that respect in Exts.P3 and P6. The petitioner avers that the expansion period is from 27.3.1999 to 7.11.2000. In the above circumstances, Ext.P2 to the extent it restricts benefits to ` 13,01,457/-, Ex.P3 and Ext.P6 orders are quashed. The District Level Committee shall consider and pass orders on the question as to which is the expansion period claimed by the petitioner and whether the purchase of the vehicle is during the expansion period. The 1st respondent shall place the matter before the District Level Committee and the District Level Committee shall pass orders, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being head to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.8581/07 3