Amarjyoti Soap Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of H.P and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/891837
SubjectSales Tax/Vat
CourtHimachal Pradesh High Court
Decided OnNov-03-2009
Judge Deepak Gupta and; V.K. Ahuja, JJ.
AppellantAmarjyoti Soap Mills Pvt. Ltd.
RespondentState of H.P and ors.
Excerpt:
- code of civil procedure, 1908.[c.a. no. 5/1908]. order 14, rule 2 [as amended by amending act of 1976]: [v.k. gupta, cj, deepak gupta & surjit singh, jj] preliminary issue of law and fact court framing all issues both of law and facts together and also tried all the issues together, including the issue relating to jurisdiction of court held, except in situations perceived or warranted under sub-rule (2) of rule 2 of order 14 where a court in fact frames only issues of law in the first instance and postpones settlement of other issues, clearly and explicitly in situations where the court has framed all issues together, both of law as well as facts and has also tried all these issues together, it is not open to the court to adopt the principle of severability and proceed to decide.....deepak gupta, j.1. the main point involved in this writ petition is with regard to the interpretation of the incentives and concessions announced by the state of himachal pradesh as per the industrial policy scheme of 1999 and the notification dated 23rd july, 1999 issued for grant of incentives and concessions under the himachal pradesh general sales tax act, 1978.2. briefly stated the facts of the case are that the state of himachal pradesh with a view to encourage the setting up industrial units in the state framed an industrial policy in which certain incentives and concessions were given to the industries. we are concerned with clause 7.1.1 which reads as follows:7.1.1 village industries/tiny units: new industries with fixed capital investment upto rs. 10 lakhs and financed wholly by.....
Judgment:

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. The main point involved in this writ petition is with regard to the interpretation of the incentives and concessions announced by the State of Himachal Pradesh as per the Industrial Policy Scheme of 1999 and the notification dated 23rd July, 1999 issued for grant of incentives and concessions under the Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1978.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the State of Himachal Pradesh with a view to encourage the setting up industrial units in the State framed an Industrial Policy in which certain incentives and concessions were given to the industries. We are concerned with Clause 7.1.1 which reads as follows:

7.1.1 Village Industries/Tiny units: New Industries with fixed capital investment upto Rs. 10 lakhs and financed wholly by HPKVIB/KVIC shall b exempted from payment of sales tax for a period of 8 years in industrially backward areas and in priority sector, and for a period of 5 years for units in industrially developing areas. In respect of other new village industries and tiny units, sales tax shall be leviable at a concessional rate of 25% of the applicable rate on the sale of products upto Rs. 60.00 lacs per annum for a period of 8 years in industrially backward areas & in priority sector; and up to sales turn over of Rs. 45 lacs per annum for a period of 5 years in industrially developing areas. This concession will not be admissible to the produce of breweries/distilleries, non fruit/vegetable based wineries and bottling plants (both for Country Liquor and Indian Made Foreign Liquor).

3. It would be pertinent to mention that the units in question would also be entitled to concession on GST on the raw material, processing and packaging material etc. The notification under the H.P General Sales Tax Act was published in the H.P Rajpatra on 27th July, 2009 wherein the concessional rates were fixed. Relevant portion of the same reads as follows:

(1) In exervcise of the powers conferred by sub-section(1) of Section 42 of the Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1968 (Act No. 24 of 1968) the Government of Himachal Pradesh is pleased to direct that no tax shall be levied under Section 6 of the aforesaid Act, on the sale of goods [other than those manufactured by breweries, distilleries, non-fruit/vegetable based wineries and bottling plants (both of country liquor and Indian Made Foreign liquor) manufactured by the dealers running such new Village Industrial Units:

Which have fixed capital investment upto Rs. 10.00 lakhs and which are wholly financed by the Commission constituted under the Khadi and Village Industries Act, 1956 or the Board constituted under the Himachal Pradesh Khadi and Village Industries Board Act, 1966:

(i) for a period of 8 years in case the unit is located in the Industrially Backward areas or in case the unit is a priority industrial unit, and

(ii) for a period of 5 years in case the unit is located in the Industrially Developing areas; from the date of commencement of commercial production or from the date of this notification, whichever is later.

The Governor is further pleased to direct that the tax shall be levied at the rate of 25 per cent of the rates notified or specified under Section 6 of the aforesaid Act on the sale of goods [other than those manufactured by the breweries, distilleries, non-fruit/vegetable based wineries and bottling plants (both of country liquor and Indian Made Foreign Liquor) manufactured by the dealers running new village industrial unit (other than those specified in para 1 of this notification) and new tiny industrial units:

(i) for a period of 8 years in case the unit is located in the Industrially Backward areas or in case the unit is a priority industrial unit, and

(ii) for a period of 5 years in case the unit is located in the Industrially Developing areas; from the date of commencement of commercial production or from the date of this notification, which is later.

The Governor is further pleased to direct that the concession of partial exemption contained in Para 2 of this notification shall be admissible only if:

(i) the annual turnover, in respect of the unit located in the industrially backward areas or in respect of a priority sector, does not exceed Rupees Sixty Lakhs and

(ii) the annual turnover, in respect of the unit located in the industrially developing areas or in respect of a priority unit, does not exceed Rupees Forty lakhs.

4. According to the petitioner, the notification issued under Clause 3 of the H.P General Sales Tax Act must be read in consonance with the incentive policy and the benefit of concessional rate of tax or exemption from payment of tax should be available upto the prescribed annual turnover. On the other hand, the stand of the State is that if the turnover of the concerned unit goes over the prescribed limits of Rs. 45 lacs and Rs. 60 lacs, then the unit is liable to pay sales tax at full rates even on the turnover upto the limit of Rs. 45 lacs and Rs. 60 lacs.

5. A perusal of the Incentive Policy clearly shows that it was held out to the investors that if a village industry/tiny unit with a fixed capital investment upto Rs. 10 lacs is financed wholly by the HPKVIB/KVIC then the unit is entitled to total exemption of sales tax for a period of eight years if the unit is located in industrially backward areas and falls in the priority sector and for a period of five years in industrially developing areas. However, in respect of other new village industries and tiny units with fixed capital investment upto Rs. 10 lacs, sales tax shall be leviable at a concessional rate of 25% of the applicable rate on the sale of products upto Rs. 60 lacs per annum for a period of eight years if the unit is located in industrially backward areas and produces goods mentioned in the priority sector and for a period of five years upto sales turnover of Rs. 45 lacs per annum in case of industrially developing areas.

6. The State contends that in terms of Clause 3 of the said notification, the concession shall not be admissible in case the annual turnover of the unit located in industrially backward areas and in priority sector exceeds Rs. 60 lacs or Rs. 45 lacs in case of a unit located in industrially developing areas. When we read the Incentive Policy alongwith the notification of the Government including Clause 2, it is apparent that the intention was to make the exemption/concession available to the units for the period prescribed upto certain prescribed limits. In case of units falling in the priority sector and located in the industrially backward areas, the concession was for a period of eight years and in case of other units, the concession was available only for a period of five years.

7. Sh. Ram Murti Bhisht, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State contends that if the turnover of the unit crosses the prescribed limit then it is not entitled to any benefit of concession/exemption and will have to pay full sales tax as prescribed in the rules.

8. We are unable to accept this contention of the State. This would make the very Incentive Policy infructuous. We must remember that sales tax is an indirect tax which the producer has to collect from the customer. In case the unit is located in the industrially backward area and falls in the priority sector as per the notification for eight years, no tax had to be paid upto a turnover of Rs. 60 lacs per annum. We may take the example of a unit where the turnover for the entire year is Rs. 61 lacs. If the argument made on behalf of the State is accepted then the result would be that the unit would have to pay sales tax on the entire sales of Rs. 61 lacs at the full prescribed rate whereas on sales upto Rs. 60 lacs it will not have collected any sales tax from the customers.

9. It will make the units totally uneconomic and unviable. How can an assessee who has not collected sales tax be directed to deposit the sales tax?

10. The only logical interpretation which can be given to sale tax notification to make it workable in accordance with the incentive policy is that the eligible units will be entitled to the exemption/concession upto the prescribed limit of Rs. 60 lacs and Rs. 45 lacs and if the turnover exceeds the aforesaid prescribed limits then it will have to pay full sales tax on the sales exceeding the prescribed limit. This will lead to certainty in the mind of the entrepreneur. He knows that upto Rs. 45 lacs or Rs. 60 lacs, he is entitled to either a concessional rate of sales tax or full exemption. Thereafter, he has to pay full sales tax on the sales exceeding over and above the prescribed limit.

11. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the notification dated 23rd July, 1999 has to be read in a manner indicated here in-above and the assessing authorities shall accordingly decide the case of the petitioner. No order as to costs.