JUDGMENT S. C. CHATTERJEE, J. - The present writ petition has been filed praying, inter alia, for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the application of the petitioners for exemption of payment of sales tax for manufacturing and selling goods falling under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, in accordance with law and to rescind, recall and/or cancel the order dated 16th June, 1987, passed in revision case No. 253/86-87 and for other consequential reliefs as fully stated in the writ petition itself. It is stated that the petitioners started manufacturing wooden furniture and the partnership firm was registered with the Directorate of Cottage and Small-scale Industries, Government of West Bengal as a small-scale industrial unit. It is further stated that since the petitioners' firm is a small-scale unit and started business only in the year 1979, the petitioners are otherwise entitled to have the exemption of payment of sales tax and, in fact, the petitioners filed an application on 16th December, 1980, for exemption under the provisions of 1941 Act. By an order dated 22nd January, 1982, the said application of the petitioners for the eligibility certificate was taken up for hearing and since the petitioners' advocate could not attend the hearing and asked for adjournment of the case, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Calcutta, rejected the said application. Being aggrieved by the order dated 22nd January, 1982, the petitioners filed revisional application on 12th July, 1982, before the Additional Commissioner of Taxes. By the order dated 17th May, 1984, in case No. 81/82-83 the said respondent disposed of the revisional application holding that the Assistant Commissioner was quite reasonable in rejecting the two applications of the petitioners ex parte and the order of the Assistant Commissioner was not interfered with. Thereafter on 31st January, 1985, the petitioners made another application for review of the said order dated 17th May, 1984, on the ground that while rejecting the order dated 22nd January, 1982, no opportunity of hearing being given, the petitioners have suffered irreparable loss and injury. Thereafter on 31st January, 1985, the petitioners made another application for review of the said order dated 17th May, 1984, on the ground that while rejecting the order dated 22nd January, 1982, no opportunity of hearing being given, the petitioners have suffered irreparable loss and injury. Further by order dated 27th September, 1985, the said review application of the petitioners was allowed and the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes made a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to dispose of the petitioners' application for eligibility certificate under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, afresh in accordance with law. While the said revisional application was pending before the respondent No. 2, respondent No. 4 allegedly made the assessment against the petitioners. Pursuant to the direction given by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the petitioners' application for eligibility certificate was fixed for hearing on 10th March, 1986. On that date the petitioners duly appeared before the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and made their submissions. By an order dated 10th March, 1986, the respondent No. 1 rejected the petitioners' application finding, inter alia, that the applicants have not kept the bills in relation to the goods allegedly manufactured in the unit serially numbered in so far as they have raised and maintained bills for rental and consultation charges. Against the said order dated 10th March, 1986, the petitioners filed a revisional application on 2nd December, 1986, before the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, West Bengal, challenging the said order of rejection of the eligibility certificate. On 16th June, 1987, the said revisional application of the petitioners came up for hearing before the respondent No. 2 and it was found that in the purchase voucher no address of the seller is mentioned and in the absence of the required particulars verification of the purchase would not be made possible by the Assistant Commissioner. Upon such observation the revisional application was rejected. Upon such observation the revisional application was rejected. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 16th June, 1987, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the petitioners have come to this Court on the ground that the order dated 16th June, 1987, is bad in law inasmuch as the notification by which exemption has been sought to be given to a newly set up small-scale industrial unit does not contemplate serial numbering of bills in respect of notified commodities sold and as such the question of keeping bills of notified commodities serially numbered does not and cannot arise. The attention of this Court has been drawn to the notification for "tax holiday for newly set up small-scale industrial unit - period of benefit is extended", which are as follows : "The main conditions to avail the benefit of tax holiday are that (i) such industrial unit is registered with the Cottage and Small-scale Industries Department of the Government of West Bengal; (ii) the investment of the dealer on plants and machinery, excluding land and building, does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs; (iii) he starts production for the first time after 31st March, 1978; (iv) he keeps separate accounts in respect of such industrial unit, etc., and (v) the new unit is not established solely or substantially with the plant or machinery of another such unit which earlier availed of this exemption or tax holiday and which is not engaged in the business of manufacturing such plant or machinery". Mr. Pal, learned Advocate appearing for the writ petitioners has mainly submitted that in any event the conditions laid down in the rule which enables newly set up small-scale industrial unit to enjoy tax holiday for seven years having been fulfilled by the petitioners their right to enjoy the tax holiday cannot be curtailed and/or prevented and/or, prohibited by introducing new words, namely, "notified commodities" in allowing the application for exemption. Mr. Bose, learned Advocate appearing for the State, has opposed the writ petition by submitting, inter alia, that the orders complained of are free from any encumbrances and this writ court may not give any indulgence to the petitioners in the manner as prayed for. Having considered the allegations and counter-allegations made by the respective parties this Court finds that the application for eligibility certificate filed by the petitioners has not been considered in the proper perspective. Having considered the allegations and counter-allegations made by the respective parties this Court finds that the application for eligibility certificate filed by the petitioners has not been considered in the proper perspective. An opportunity should be given to the petitioners to adduce further evidence in support of the application for eligibility certificate and a proper opportunity of hearing must be given to the petitioners to produce proper materials to justify the claim of tax holidays. The conditions laid down in the rules must be followed and a proper order ought to be passed for the ends of justice. Accordingly the impugned orders in revision as well as the rejection of the application for eligibility certificate are set aside. The respondent concerned is directed to hear afresh the application for eligibility certificate taking into account the materials on record and also other evidence if produced by the petitioner in support of his contention and to examine the case on the condition laid down in the rules and dispose of the petitioners' application for eligibility certificate within four months from the date of communication of this order by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not decided anything as to the merit of the contention of the petitioners at this stage. With this observation the writ petition is disposed of. There will be status quo as to the realisation of the assessed amount till the disposal of the application as indicated above. This order will govern the other application moved on 25th November, 1987, on behalf of the same petitioners. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.