HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition Na. 1187 of 1998 Petitioners Grasim Industries Ltd. & Another Vs. Respondents State of Madhya Pradesh 8: Others Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Aqnihotri, J. Present: 'Shri Ashish Shrivastava and Shri Akhiiesh Dalpati, Advocates for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Kaohhwaha, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Shri Bhishma Kinger, Advocate for the respondent No.4 & 5. ORDER IORAL) (Passed on 05.10.2010) 1. Heard teamed counsei for the parties. 2. Learned counsei appearing for the parties jointiy submit that the issue involved in the case asto whether High Speed Diesel (HSD) and LOD is covered by the notification dated 19-2-1 991 whereby the petitioner’s exemption of tax on petroi/diesel Le. S.No.15 (h) of list of raw-materiais annexed to the certificate dated 15-1 1—1 996, is squarely covered by the decisions of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh rendered in Mysore Cement Ltd. & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesii & Others1 and in SRF Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others? 3. in this petition, chailenge is to the order issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, indore, by which the petitioner has been informed that it is not entitled torelaxation in payment of tax on high speed diesel and inconsequence, oil companies have intimated the same to the petitioner. The grievance made by the 1 W.P.No. 1319 of 1999 (decided on 0611 0/1999) z [2000] 33 VKN 389 (MP) \ \ petitioner in this petition is that it is entitled to concession granted to it and the impugned order passed by the Commissioner, Commerciat Tax may be quashed and the tax amount aiready collected may be refunded to the petitioner. Even though various grounds have been raised and urged in the petition, it is not in dispute that the question involved in this petition and consequence of the notification issued by the State Government and subsequently withdrawing concession was considered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Mysore Cement Ltd. (supra) and quashed the impugned order holding that the petitioners were entitted to the concession. Following the judgment in Mysore Cement Ltd. (supra), the issue involved in SRF Ltd. (supra) was decided by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Considering the aforesaid judgments rendered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and as i am in full agreement with the View of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Mysore Cement Ltd. (supra) and SRF Ltd. (supra), there is no reason why similar benefit should not be granted to the petittoner. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Mysore Cement Ltd. (supra), the letters issued by the Commissioners, Commercial Tax Department and consequently by the respondent Oil Companies withdrayVlng concession and refusing to grant exemption from tax are quashed. in the result, the writ petition is altowed. No order asto oosts. Gown Sdl- l Satish K. Agnihotri l Judge