VISHNU KHANDSARI UDYOG Vs. GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ petitions raise a common question and, therefore, they are heard together and disposed of by this judgment. It is the case of the petitioners that relying upon the Government resolution dated 22nd December, 1977 and 27th August, 1980, they had established a new industry for manufacturing khandsari from sugarcane and had, thus, become entitled to the benefit of purchasing free of sales tax raw materials, packing materials and processing materials utilised for the purpose of manufacturing khandsari. In spite of that, the respondents are refusing to grant benefit of sales tax exemption with respect to the purchase of materials, namely, sugarcane.

(2.) THE first petitioner is Special Civil Application No. 103 of 1985 is a partnership firm. It came into existence on 1st April, 1981. Immediately thereafter, they acquired land and obtained registration as a small-scale industrial unit. It completed the construction work and started commercial production on 8th February, 1982. By that time, it had invested about Rs. 19,70,177. The Industries Commissioner granted eligibility certificate on 27th January, 1983. In view of the Notification dated 5th February, 1981, whereby exemption from payment of purchase tax payable under section 15 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, only has been granted, the petitioners, apprehending that the Government was trying to back out of its promise by not extending similar benefits with respect to the tax payable under section 18 of the Act, have filed Special Civil Application No. 103 of 1985.

(3.) THE petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 6038 of 1986 is also a partnership firm. It was constituted on 12th March, 1981 and after setting up a factory, it started commercial production on 15th February, 1982 and obtained eligibility certificate on 22nd December, 1982. The petitioner's claim for exemption from payment of purchase tax on the sugarcane utilised for manufacture of khandsari was not accepted by the Sales Tax Officer and he passed assessment orders accordingly for Samvat Years 2038 and 2039. The petitioner is challenging these orders of assessment and also wants this Court to issue a direction to the respondents that they are bound to carry out the promise contained in Government resolution dated 27th August, 1980 and for that reason, they should not recover any purchase tax from the petitioner under section 18 of the Act. Even though all the petitioners have challenged the validity of the notification dated 5th February, 1981, issued under section 49 of the Act, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that they are not now challenging the said notification and that they are basing their claim only on the doctrine of promissory estoppel. It is, therefore, not necessary to consider other contentions raised in the petitions and the only point, which really arises for consideration, is whether any representation was made by the Government either by its resolution dated 22nd December, 1977 or the resolution dated 27th August, 1980, that new industrial units will be entitled to purchase raw materials, including sugarcane, without payment of purchase tax under any of the sections, including section 18 of the Act.