ANJANEY FERRO ALLOYS LTD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the counsels for the parties in the Writ Petition (T) No. 2890 of 2011, 6163 of 2006, 667 of 2007 as well as in W.P.(T) No. 2847 of 2008. In these cases, the issues, the facts and question of laws are common, and therefore, they have been considered together and are being decided by this common judgment. However, so far as the W.P.(T) No.658 of 2007, 646 of 2007, 645 of 2007, 656 of 2007 and W.P.(T) No. 650 of 2007 are the matters, wherein the counsels for the parties have submitted that these matters may be decided after disposal of the petitions referred above because the decision in above matters will have material bearing on their petitions and/or some of the petitions may also stand covered by the judgment which is going to be rendered in the writ petition No.2890 of 2011, 6163 of 2006, 667 of 2007 and 598 of 2007 in spite of having some more points raised in these petitions.

(2.) We take the facts of the case of W.P.(T) No. 6163 of 2006( M/s Atibir Hi- Tech Pvt. Ltd) because of the reason that the said writ petition was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court by the judgment dated 11.1.2007. But, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3450 of 2008 in the case of this writ petitioner- Atibir Hi-Tech Pvt. Ltd. sent back the matter to this Court for deciding in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 30.4.2008.

(3.) In W.P.(T) No.6163 of 2006 M/s Atibir Hi- Tech Pvt. Ltd., challenged the order dated 3.3.2006 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Giridih Circle, Giridih, whereby the petitioner's application Dated 26.2.2006 for cancellation of registration certificate issued under Rule 4 of the Bihar Electricity Duty Rules, 1949, and for refund of the amount paid by way of electricity duty was rejected. The said Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes also directed the writ petitioner to make the payment of the electricity duty together with the surcharge.