COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER SURI Vs. ANADI NATH HALDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated August 6, 1986, passed by the learned trial Judge in Civil Rule No. 132 (W) of 1985. By the aforesaid judgment the writ petition made by the respondent, Sri Anadi Nath Halder, carrying on business under the trade name of Coconut Oil Industries was allowed by the learned trial Judge and it has been held that the writ petitioner-respondent clearly comes within the purview of rule 3 (66) (iv) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 and the writ petitioner is, therefore, entitled to get eligibility certificate for exemption of sales tax. It appears that the writ petitioner is a registered dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, with effect from May 20, 1983. The said dealer made an application for an eligibility certificate under rule 3 (66) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941.

(2.) THE Assistant Commissioner, Asansol Circle, rejected such application on a number of grounds and it was held by the said Assistant Commissioner that the production of coconut oil commenced only on March 24, 1983. But the statutory requirement for getting such exemption under rule 3 (66) is that such production must commence between March 31, 1978 and March 14, 1983.

(3.) THE revision application, however, was not allowed by the Additional Commissioner on the ground that the application for issue of eligibility certificate was made on June 8, 1983, which was beyond the statutory period, the last date of which was April 14, 1983. Being aggrieved by such rejection of the application for eligibility certificate, the writ petition was moved by the said dealer and it was contended by the dealer that as he was a registered dealer no time-limit was prescribed for making an application for eligibility certificate in view of the amendment of sub-clause (iv) of rule 3 (66 ). But such amendment was effected on April 1, 1983 and a proviso was added by which a registered dealer was allowed for eligibility certificate even after April 14, 1983, because no outer-limit for making such application was mentioned in the said proviso.