IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.9858 of 2008 Date of decision: 19.11.2008 M/s Hindustan Plywood Industries. -----Petitioner Vs. The State of Haryana and others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL Present:- Mr. Avneesh Jhingan, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ritu Bahri, DAG, Haryana. ----- ORDER: 1. This petition seeks quashing of orders Annexures P-4, P-6 and P-8 dated 1.5.2006, 22.1.2007 and 22.1.2008 respectively. 2. Case of the petitioner is that it was granted benefit under rule 28-C(5)(a) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975, which envisaged benefits to the new and expanded units and after grant of the said benefit, vide order dated 1.5.2006 (Annexure P-4), the respondents purportedly changed the date of entitlement of the petitioner for concession to the date of production instead of date of issuance of certificate which resulted in curtailing the period upto which the petitioner could have continued to avail the benefits. The petitioner filed an appeal by submitting that eligibility certificate had been rightly C.W.P. No.9858 of 2008 issued from the date of certificate and not from the date of production. The appeal was dismissed on 22.1.2007 (Annexure P-6) as no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Revision petition against the said order was also dismissed on 22.1.2008 vide Annexure P-8. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not appear on account of sufficient cause as no intimation was received. The appellate authority does not meet on regular basis on pre-notified or well known schedule of dates. In the impugned order, it was wrongly held that the petitioner was duly informed and still failed to appear. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner as under the rules, the eligibility commences only from the date of production irrespective of the date from which the certificate is issued. 5. We are of the view that, at this stage, we need not express any opinion on merits. In the facts of the case, it will be just and fair if the petitioner is given an opportunity of being heard by the appellate authority. 6. Accordingly, we allow this petition and direct the appellate authority to take a fresh decision after giving hearing to the petitioner. The petition is disposed of. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE November 19, 2008 ( L. N. MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2