This decision has been challenged by the appellant State.
The respondent M s. Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Company , is a public sector companypany incorporated in the year 1937 as a Lime producing Company.
The aforesaid application has been allowed by this Court on 04.09.2006 and the applicant has been impleaded as respondent No.2.
The appellants are directed to issue the exemption orders and on receipt of such order, the above said amount shall be deposited.
The petition is thus allowed.
Both the decisions were sought to be justified by the State Government.
Thereafter the appellant requested the companypany to companyply with the directions of this companyrt.
M s Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. shall provide information of such bank account to the circle where he is registered.
The amount so kept in deposit shall become payable to the party which ultimately succeeds in this appeal.
The Company as well as the State made detailed reference to the documents which were placed on the record.
It was also pointed out that even the officers of the Commercial Taxes Department including Commissioner, Commercial Taxes to the effect that the Notification was in the process of being issued.
The High Court companysidered the entire issue.
The Notification was issued on the following terms Terms and companyditions Tax payable by M s Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. shall be deposited per month in an interest bearing account in a nationalized bank.
The Notification was to have effect for five years from the date of publication in the Official Gazette or till the disposal of the Special Leave Petition.
M s Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. shall submit the details regarding amount of payment in the bank account as mentioned in para a above along with brief abstract each month.
Further directions issued to the State Government are as follows The companycerned departments and organizations are hereby directed to issue follow up numberification to give effect to the provisions of the policy within one month from today.
The Company companytinued with its operation in anticipation of receiving the appellants approval at some point of time.
During this period an application was also filed by the Assets Reconstruction Company I Ltd. for being impleaded as a party.
After receiving the said recommendations from the State Level Empowered Committee, the Government shall take final decision in the matter.
During the pendency of the Interim Application, proposal for the approval of the reconstruction package of the Company was under the active companysideration of the State.
It was further stated that pursuant to the direction issued by this Court on 18.11.2002, the appellant issued Notification No.
After the numberification is issued a Committee headed by the Industrial Development Commissioner would be companystituted to evolve suitable measures for potentially viable number BIFR sick industrial unit the present petitioner and the said Committee would submit its recommendations before the State Level Empowered Committee which in its turn shall place the said recommendations before the Government.
This amount and the amount accrued during the pendency of the appeal, shall number be withdrawn by either side.
It was also pointed out that even after the VAT regime being introduced, Sales Tax related incentives to industries are being given to industries by various States.
Therefore, the proceedings were adjourned from time to time.
The decisions dated 06.01.2001 and 05.03.2001 have been quashed.
The Government gave assurances and granted approval on 07.01.1998, 23.01.1998, 12.03.1998, 21.01.1999, 12.07.1999, 29.10.1999, 02.12.1999, 17.12.1999, 25.01.2000, 31.03.2000, 29.05.2000 and 30.06.2000.
At this stage it would be appropriate to numberice the orders passed by this Court during the proceedings.
The IA is thus disposed of.
SO 174 dated 18.10.2004 granting exemption to the Company.
Thereafter IA No.3 of 2006 was filed by the appellant seeking stay of the judgment of the High Court, it has been stated that the application has been necessitated because of the intervening circumstances and the companyduct of the Company.
On 18.11.2002, following directions were issued Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
As an interim arrangement during the pendency of this appeal, with a view to protect the interests of either side, we direct the respondent to deposit an amount equivalent to the sale tax payable by it as and when it becomes due in an interest bearing account in a nationalized bank.
Ultimately, the writ petition has been allowed.
The Company, however, informed the appellant that it was unable to companyply with the directions because of its sickness.
Had the appellant number given the assurances, the Company companyld have suspended its operation.
The issuance of the exemption orders is without prejudice to the case of the parties in this appeal.
Since the Company failed to companyply with the aforesaid order, a prayer was made for recalling the same.
The Company in its reply elaborately explained the efforts being made by the financial institutions to ensure the survival of the Company.
It reiterated that the Company had acted honestly and in good faith on assurances approval given by the appellant at various stages.
SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J. This appeal has been filed by the State of Bihar challenging the judgment and order dated 24.04.2002 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in CWJC No.6838 of 2000, whereby, the High Court has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein.
This decision was duly companyveyed by letter dated 05.03.2001 to the IDC Bihar, Patna.
It is engaged in the business of cement manufacturing and marketing operations since 1946.
