IN Th HIGH CWRT OF KRN iTAK AT BA?GALORE ED ThiS THE 4th DY OF JJNE,1998, BEFORE ThE HONBLE Mk.JusricE V,K.SINGHAL TP LI ONN 3581O- 17 OF 1997, i/ Dendeli Steel Ferro t11oys Latd., Dandeli 581 325 (Utter Kannada) Karnataica State 4 Rep,by its Deputy General Manager (Finance) A.3,Dixit, ,,, Petitioner, (By sri,S,Parthasdrathi Adv,for Petitioner.) AND: 1,The dd1.Dy.Con.nissioner (Asseasnents), I4ngareddy 3uilciing, Kalgatgi Rodd, %arwad— 580 002. ... Res?ondenL —2-. 2.Joint ownissjoner of onvnercja1 Taxes (A&nn, )Klhavan, Dharwad - 580 002. 3. State of Karnataka Rep,by its Cownissioner of Coirnercial Taxes 0 Vaniya Therige Karyalaya, Gandhi nagar Bangalore — SóO 0o. •.. Respondents. (By t.S.Sujatha,HcP, for Responderts.) Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a affi-. davit, aying to declare that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of defent in — terns of New Industrial Policy l993_98Govern-. nent order No.CI 140 SPC 93, Bangalore dtea: l24.93 the notifications is9ied tnereunder U/sd-.A of the Act and t certificate of -.3. —3-. defernent dt:23.4. 7 order dt:12.7.3 and Notifications U/ 3 ,8-.A have been published in Karnataka Sales rax Publicationg.) etc.,, Writ petitior coning on for preli— 6 ninary hearing this”’day the Curt made the following: The controversy in the present ‘ratter stcXds concluded bj the decision given in the case Of WIPRO INFOTH LLtd. -.Vs,-.Addj. Dy.o!nmissioner Writ Appeal No.3791/97, D,D,13.3,98, The present natters are also disposed of with the same observations and directions. 4. —4-- The various orders which have been passed by the Assessing Authority cdxary to the orders of the ivisIofl Bench would not be taken. sd/-JUrxTh ss. r.by: L:;