IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Smt.Jaita Devi vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5913/07) Dated:- 5.12.2007. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr.Lalit Pareek, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S.Godara, for the respondentes. BY THE COURT:- The petitioner, a woman entrepreneur , established an industrial unit for manufacture of plaster of paris in village Manderpura, tehsil Nohar, district Hanumangarh. The petitioner claimed exemption from payment of tax on the sale of the goods manufactured by it in terms of the notification dated 12.3.07 issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 15 read with Section 100 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 and Rule 74 of Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995, whereby the benefit of exemption from tax has been extended to the units established exclusively by woman enterpreneuers in tiny sector on the conditions specified in the said notification. The precise grievance of the petitioner is that on one hand the petitioner 's application for grant of benefit of exemption from payment of tax is not being decided by the respondents, on the other hand, the demand of tax has been created against the petitioner . Accordingly, in this writ petition, the petitioner has sought declaration that she is entitled for exemption from payment of tax on sale of plaster of paris manufactured by it, as a tiny sector woman entrepreneur and sought further direction against the respondent to issue the certificate and not to initiate recovery proceedings till her application dated 18.4.05 seeking benefit of exemption is decided. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents. It is stated therein that as per the condition no.3 of the notification dated 12.3.07, the exemption certificate would be issued by the concerned Dy.Commissioner(Administration) only after being satisfied about the eligibility of the unit established by a woman entrepreneur,therefore, it is only after issuance of the eligibility certificate, the unit becomes entitle to claim exemption. It is submitted that already existing unit which is merely taken over by a woman entrepreneur for the sole purpose of availing tax exemption is not entitled to get benefit of the said notification being not exclusively established by the woman entrepreneur. It is further stated that the application dated 5.4.05 submitted by the petitioner to the Dy.Commissioner(Administration), Sri Ganganagar was sent to the Assistant Commissioner(Circle), Hanumangarh on 26.4.05 for conducting the necessary eligibility inquiry and sending the report. Thereafter, the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 has been repealed w.e.f. 1.4.06 and stands substituted by Rajasthan Value Added Tax, 2003 , consequently, the notification dated 12.3.97 ceased to exist w.e.f. 1.4.07, therefore, no exemption certificate could have been issued to the petitioner under the said notification. It is stated that in view of the subsequent amendment in the Schedule II of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax, 2003 and the notification dated 29.4.06, the entrepreneurs who have not been granted exemption certificate are also not eligible for exemption after 1.4.06. A rejoinder to the reply has been filed, wherein the factual and legal position as alleged in the reply has been disputed by the petitioner. It is not in dispute that as on the date , the petitioner applied for the grant of the benefit of exemption, the notification dated 12.3.97 was in force and the competent authority was under an obligation to decide the same in accordance with law. Even if, according to the respondents, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of benefits on account of the repeal of the Act of 1994 or on account of some subsequent notification issued, then too, the application preferred by the petitioner for the grant of benefit of exemption has to be decided in accordance with law. Obviously, the petitioner has a right to contend that the interpretation of the provisions of relevant statute and the notification issued thereunder made by the respondents is not correct. It is not the case of the respondents that the application preferred by the petitioner has been duly considered by the competent authority and the same stands rejected. In this view of the matter, application of the petitioner seeking exemption from payment of tax in terms of notification dated 12.3.97, has to be decided on its own merits by the competent authority in accordance with law. In the result, the writ petition is partly allowed. The respondent no.2 is directed to decide the application preferred by the petitioner for the grant of the benefit of exemption in terms of the notification dated 12.3.07 as amended vide notification dated 24.3.05 within a period of one month from the date of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by a speaking order. No coercive methods shall be adopted for recovery of the demand, if any, created for the period the petitioner is claiming benefit of exemption under the said notification, till the disposal of the aforesaid application of the petitioner by the competent authority. No order as to costs. (SANGEET LODHA),J.