High CourtsDivision Bench(2001) 02 PAT CK 0008

Maharani Fuels (P) Ltd. vs The State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 26 February 2001 · Citation: (2001) 3 PLJR 119

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J · Shashank Kumar Singh, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
C.W.J.C. No. 11480 of 1998

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 268 words
1.

This petition has been filed in effect, that the Petitioner be granted a tax holiday, re. sales tax regard being had to the industry which has been set up. The industry is special smokless fuel. The contention of the Petitioner are two fold-(a) that it should be put into 1986 policy as it was extended and In the alternative (b) the 1995 policy.

2.

In so far as the first aspect is concerned, upon exchange of pleadings the record is thus:

The Petitioner''s factory did not go into production even until 31 March, 1993. If the 1986 policy was to be availed of then the Petitioner ought to have written to the Director of Industries within 30 days of the date of production whether it desired to avail of the benefits so announced by the incentive policy. It is acknowledged at the Bar and record, both, that the Petitioner did not respond by seeking the benefits of incentive policy.

In so far as claiming any benefit out of the 1995 policy is concerned, this was applicable to such units which went into production between 1.9.1995 and 31.8.2000. The Petitioner''s unit went into production on 18 February, 1994. The 1995 policy was not applicable to the Petitioner.

3.

In the circumstances, it will not be appropriate that the Court issues a mandamus to the State Government that the benefits of a certain policy be granted to the Petitioner firstly when the Petitioner had not even applied and secondly if it was a subsequent policy the Petitioner does not come within it. The writ sought is declined.

4.

Dismissed.