Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


M/S Sheela Foam (P) Limited Thru' Manager P.K. Singh v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT TAX No. 969 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 11045 (6 July 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.32

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.969/06 (Tax)

M/s Sheela Foam (P) Limited vs. State of U.P. & others

Hon'ble S. Rafat Alam, J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Shri Bharat Ji Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of U.P. as well as Central Sales Tax Act and holds eligibility certificate under Section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act whereunder he is entitled to get exemption from payment of tax in respect of the units, which has undertaken expansion, on the turn over, which is in excess of base production.  It is submitted that the aforesaid eligibility certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner on 23.12.1995 granting him exemption from payment of tax for a period of 8 years w.e.f. 1993 to 31.8.2001 to the extent of 100% of the fixed capital investment.  It is also contended that the State Government in circulars dated 3.2.1993 and 26.8.1998 has clarified that while computing base production stock transfer, consignment sales is also to be included, which are in accordance with the provisions of U.P. as well as Central Sales Tax Act.  It is further submitted that in G.O. dated 18.8.1998 it was provided that while computing base production turn over under modification dated 27.7.1991 the stock transfer or consignment sales or turn over in the course of export on which no tax is liable to be paid shall also be included while determining the quantity of turn over of base production.  It is further submitted that the petitioner has challenged the re-assessment proceeding for the assessment years 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 in writ petition nos.31 of 2004, 618 of 2004 and 812 of 2005 with similar grievance wherein another Division Benches of this Court have granted interim orders staying further proceeding.  It is further stated that the impugned circular dated 25.1.2003 is subject matter of challenge in writ petition no.564 of 2006 for the assessment year 2003-04 wherein also a Division Bench has granted interim order vide order dated 28.3.2006 staying the operation of circular dated 25.1.2003 and the notice dated 12.3.2006 in respect to the petitioner.


Shri Sahai, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file counter affidavit.  The petitioner may file rejoinder affidavit within a week thereafter.  

Connect with Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos.812 (tax) of 2005 and 564 of 2006 and list before the appropriate Bench on the date fixed.

In view of the submissions made and also in view of the interim order granted in other writ petitions, stated above, further proceeding under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act in respect of assessment year 1999-2000 under the Act shall remain stayed until further order of this Court.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.