BHARATI TELTECH LIMITED Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (for short, "the Act") and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It claimed sales tax exemption under Rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (for short, "the Rules") which was granted by the Higher Level Screening Committee in its meeting held on November 21, 1994 approving case of the petitioner for availing sales tax exemption for Rs. 494.80 lakhs for a period of 7 years from December 13, 1991 to December 12, 1998 on the sale of Electronic Publication Telephone (for short, the "EPBT"). Subsequently, on May 3, 1997, it made an application seeking amendment in the eligibility certificate so as to include certain other items. The Higher Level Screening Committee rejected that application vide order dated July 22, 1997. Petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Industries which was accepted and the matter was remained to the Higher Level Screening Committee to revise the eligibility certificate allowing the benefit of sales tax exemption on additional items. However, the period of exemption remained unaltered. Petitioner availed full benefit of exemption.

(2.) After the expiry period of exemption, the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Gurgaon, while monitoring the production level of the petitioner's unit, noticed that it was not maintaining the level of production of preceding five years and had thereby violated the provisions of Rule 28A(11)(a)(i). Consequently, he initiated proceedings against the petitioner and held it liable under Rule 28A(11)(b) to make full payment of tax exemption benefit availed by it during the concession period alongwith interest. A copy of the order of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner has been placed as annexure P8. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Rohtak, which was rejected vide order dated February 27, 2001 (annexure P10). Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana which was also rejected vide order dated September 26, 2002 (annexure P13). It is against these orders that the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Shri M.L. Sarin, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, contended that the action of the respondents in withdrawing exemption was not justified as there was no violation of Rule 28A(11)(a)(i) of the Rules. The production of the petitioner had not fallen below the level of average production for the preceding five years. He referred to the comparative figures as reflected in the following chart furnished before the Tribunal : <TAB> (Quantity manufactured in lakhs) Particulars EPBT Pagers Spares Total Preceding 5 calendar 18.96 0.22 23.24 42.42 years (1994-1998) Average of preceding 3.79 0.04 4.65 8.48 5 years. Subsequent 3 calen- 27.95 Nil 44.72 72.67 dar years (1999-2001) Average of subse- 9.32 Nil 14.90 24.22 quent 3 years. (Turnover of goods manufactured Rupees in lakhs) Particulars Amount (Rs. in lakhs) Preceding 5 calendar years (1994-1998) 8,830.43 Average of preceding 5 years 1,766.09 Subsequent 3 calendar years (1999-2001) 1,123.81 Average of subsequent 3 years 3,746.05 </TAB>