State Of Haryana & Ors vs M/S. Baldev Spinners Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

Name of the Zone and Small Scale Medium Scale/large Time Limit the area comprised scale therein Zone `B' comprising 125% of fixed 100% of fixed capital 7 years areas other than Zones capital investment but not `A' and `C' investment exceeding Rs.1.5 crores Provided that in the case of exemption, the benefit shall extend to tax on gross turn over and in the case of deferment, it shall extend to tax on the taxable turn over of goods manufactured by the unit.

70. The respondent sent a reply dated 26.3.1988 stating that as its unit was situated in an area surrounded by a large number of factories, the area should be considered as a non-agricultural area. It also contended that the department was not earlier insisting upon the production of such NOC/CLU certificate if the industry was situated in an area, where several industries were situated. The LLSC gave a hearing on 3.11.1998 to the respondent. During the hearing, the respondent's Director was informed that the District Town Planner, Panipat on verification had informed the LLSC that the respondent's unit fell in an area where, for setting up an industry, a NOC/CLU certificate was required from the Town Planning Department. The respondent's director admitted that respondent had not obtained such NOC/CLU Certificate. The LLSC therefore took a decision to withdraw the eligibility certificate issued to the respondent for non-production of NOC/CLU certificate. The General Manager, District Industries Centre, 9 Panipat, by letter dated 26.11.1998 informed the respondent about the decision of LLSC to withdraw the eligibility certificate. The appeal filed by the respondent against the said decision was rejected by the Higher Level Screening Committee by order dated 1.7.1999. The respondent challenged the said decision in CWP 13865/2000. The High Court by order dated 10.10.2000 directed the appellant authority to hear the appeal and pass a fresh order. The appeal was heard again and dismissed on 6.2.2001. The appellate authority noted that in spite of several opportunities being granted, the respondent had failed to produce the NOC/CLU Certificate. It further held that in view of the non-production of NOC/CLU certificate, the eligibility certificate issued to the respondent was void ab initio. The respondent challenged the said withdrawal of the eligibility certificate and the order of the appellate authority in CWP No.9545 of 2001. The said petition was allowed by order dated 10.12.2002. The High Court held that the eligibility certificate once granted could be withdrawn only in one of the three circumstances enumerated in clause (a) of Sub-Rule 8 of Rule 28A; and as non-production of NOC/CLU certificate was not a ground on which the eligibility certificate could be withdrawn under the said provision, the withdrawal was illegal and not justified.

16. The facts in these appeals are similar to those in Civil Appeal No.1973/2006. In all these cases also, the eligibility certificates issued to the respective respondent was withdrawn on the ground that they did not produce the NOC/CLU certificate. The High Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the respective respondent in these appeals (by order dated 2.2.2004 in CWP No.79/2004, order dated 9.12.2003 in CWP No.15989/2003, order dated 7.1.2003 in WP No.13058/2002, order dated 7.1.2003 in CWP No.11967/2002 and order dated 10.2.2004 in CWP No.9715/2003) by following its decision dated 10.12.2002 in Baldev Spinners Private Ltd. which is the subject matter of CA No.1973/2006 considered above. These appeals also stand allowed in terms of CA No. 1973/2006.

xxxxxx 5(a). Every Eligible Industrial Unit which is desirous of availing benefit under this Rule shall make an application in Form ST-70 in triplicate along with attested copies of the documents mentioned therein to the General Manager, District Industries Centre within 90 days of the date of its going into commercial production or the date of coming into force of this rule whichever is later. No application shall be entertained if not preferred within time. An application with incomplete or incorrect particulars including the documents required to be attached therewith shall be deemed as having not been made if the applicant fails to complete it on an opportunity afforded to him in this behalf. 4 5(b). Applications from small scale units will be considered by the Lower Level Screening Committee and those from Medium/Large scale units by the Higher Level Screening Committee.

Re : Question (i) :

Re : Question (ii)

(i) of Rule 28A.

15. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the challenge to the withdrawal of eligibility certificate is rejected.

Civil Appeal Nos.1976/2006, 1982/2006, 1983/2006, 1986/2006 and 350/2007.