LAMIFAB INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. Bukhari, learned AGP appears and waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case,the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) This petition is filed against an order passed by the Additional Industries Commissioner (Extension) on March 30, 1998 , Annexure `A' to the petition. By the impugned order, the petitioner was informed that its unit was found to have gone into commercial production on 23rd August, 1995 considering its first sale bill of even date. It was then stated that as the unit had not gone into commercial production during operative period of the Incentive Scheme 1990-95, the subsidy sanctionend vide sanction letter dated 21st September 1995 was required to be cancelled and was accordingly cancelled. Petitioner was,therefore, advised to get registration as pipeline case under the scheme 1990-95 for sales tax benefit through the District Industries Centre, Valsad.

(3.) The case of the petitioner was that as per the Government resolution, a scheme was framed known as "New Industrial Policy- Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme 1990-95" and the petitioner unit came to be granted capital investment subsidy registration certificate. The petitioner was entitled to the subsidy as per the scheme, but no payment was made by the respondents. Regarding disbursement of amount, relevant clause of the resolution dated 16th October 1990, Annexure `B' read as under: