Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010067362021 2025:GAU-AS:14849 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2541/2021 M/S SHIVAM PIPE INDUSTRIES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT DHANUKA COMPLEX, BLOCK C, S.J. ROAD, ATHGAON, P.O. GUWAHATI 781001, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM AND INDUSTRIAL UNIT AT VILL. DAGAON, MOUZA PUB KACHARI MAHAL, KAMALPUR, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS PARTNERS SRI RATAN BHATI, S/O RAWATMAL BHATI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE DEPTT. OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, P.O.GUWAHATI 781006, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. 2:THE ADDL. CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF FINANCE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR P.O. GUWAHATI 781006 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. DEPTT. OF FINANCE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR P.O. GUWAHATI 781006 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 4:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAWAN GANESHGURI P.O. GUWAHATI 781006 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O P BHATI, MR. S K GUPTA,MR. M K GOGOI,MR. P SARMA,MR T C DAS Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 03.11.2025 Heard Mr P Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr B Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the Finance and Taxation Department. 2. It is the submission of both the counsels at the Bar that the subject matter of this writ petition is covered by the Judgment and Order, passed in WP(C) No. 2068/2021 and other connected matters, on 29.04.2025. 3. I have gone through the order dated 29.04.2025 and find that the observations of the Court in Paragraphs-99, 100 and 101, covers the case of the petitioners. For ready reference, Paragraphs-99, 100 and 101 are quoted hereunder:- “99. This Court therefore holds that the projection of the respondents that in extending the benefit to Varun Beverages while the application of the petitioners remained unconsidered was based upon reasonable classification cannot be accepted in the absence of any materials placed before this Court as to how this reasonable classification was arrived at. If that be so, then the grievances of the petitioners must certainly be redressed by issuing appropriate direction to the respondent authorities to consider the claim the petitioners ventilated through to the applications filed before the authorities in terms of the 2019 scheme as it stood prior to its amendment in 2020 by the impugned Notification. Since it is seen that the challenge made to the amendment on the ground of violation of Article 14 emerge from the non consideration of the representation, the grievance of the petitioner can be appropriately redressed by issuing specific direction to the respondent authorities to consider their claims Under the 2020 Scheme Page No.# 3/3 as it stood prior to its amendment by way of the impugned Notification dated 30.12.2019. It is ordered accordingly. While considering such representation, the Respondents will give due consideration to all the attending facts and circumstances as have been done in cases of other similarly situated units or industries. Since this Court has come to a finding that the case of the petitioners deserve consideration by the Respondents in the same manner as other similarly situated units were given their consideration prior to impugned amendment, there is no necessity to interfere with the impugned amendment brought in. If the consideration as directed by the Respondents is given by taking into all relevant materials and the yardsticks applied to other similarly situated units, then this Court is of the view that the same will adequately redress the grievances of the petitioners. 100. Accordingly, this Court therefore directs the respondent authorities to consider the claims of the petitioners by applying the same yardstick as have been done in other similarly situated units and instances of which is placed before the Court by referring to orders passed in case of one Varun Beverages. If on the facts and circumstances as applicable to the writ petitioners their cases are found to be similarly situated as the other units or industries who have been given the benefit of extension for the period of exemption of taxes then similar benefits must be granted to the writ petitioners. The respondent authorities will consider the claims of the writ petitioners in the light of the directions granted above within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondent authorities will thereafter pass speaking order and copies thereof shall be served on the writ petitioners. 101. The writ petitions are accordingly partly allowed to the extent indicated and disposed of in terms of the above. Costs made easy.” 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 29.04.2025, passed in WP(C) No. 2068/2021 and other connected writ petitions to be made applicable to the present writ petition also. JUDGE Comparing Assistant