JUDGMENT S.N. JHA, J. 1. The petitioner seeks a declaration that it is entitled to exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials with respect to its expanded/diversified unit under Notification No. S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987 issued under section 7(3)(b) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, and accordingly further seeks quashing of the order as contained in annexure 5 dated July 12, 1995/August 4, 1995 by which the exemption certificate granted earlier to it has been cancelled. 2. In order to accelerate the pace of industrial growth in the State the Government of Bihar has taken policy decisions from time to time giving incentives of various kinds to the industrial units in all sectors, small, medium and large, such as, interest-free loan, deferment of sales tax, exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials, etc. One such policy providing for exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials, with which we are concerned in this case, is contained in resolution No. 13730 dated September 1, 1986. The relevant part of the resolution regarding exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials runs as follows : "9.1. Sales tax relief on purchase of raw materials (whether processed or unprocessed) - Large, medium, small and tiny industrial units going into production on or after 1st September, 1980 will have the option either to avail of total exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials (whether processed or unprocessed) or to get set-off of the amount paid as Bihar sales tax on purchase of raw materials against the amount of Bihar sales tax payable on the sales of finished products. This facility will be available to the industrial units for a period of 5 (five) years on such raw materials in respect of which facility of exemption or set-off is available under existing Government's orders." In order to give statutory effect to the said policy decision the State Government issued notifications vide S.O. 791 and S.O. 793 both dated September 10, 1987 under section 7(3)(b) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. 3. It would be appropriate to quote the relevant portions of the two notifications as hereunder : "S.O. 791, dated the 10th September, 1987. 3. It would be appropriate to quote the relevant portions of the two notifications as hereunder : "S.O. 791, dated the 10th September, 1987. - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 7 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (Bihar Act No. 5 of 1981), Part I, the Governor of Bihar is pleased to exempt from the levy of sales tax or purchase tax, sales of such raw materials (whether processed or unprocessed) to the owner of newly set up industrial unit in large, medium, small and tiny sectors which is approved and registered by the Industries Department of Government of Bihar or any competent authority of Government of India and which has gone into production on or after 1st September, 1986 as are specified in certificate in form B (appended herewith) obtained by him from the in-charge Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner/Commercial Taxes Officer of the circle where the industry is established after filing an application in form "A" (appended hereto) and are required by him directly for use in the manufacture of goods for sale on the following terms and conditions for a period of five years from the date on which the unit has gone into production subject to the conditions that the owner of the industry has not opted for the facility of set-off of Bihar sales tax paid on purchase of raw materials under notification issued under section 22 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 : (a) ................... S.O. 793, dated the 10th September, 1987. - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 7 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (Bihar Act No. 5 of 1981), Part I, the Governor of Bihar is pleased to exempt from the levy of 'sales tax' or 'purchase tax' sale of raw materials (whether processed or unprocessed) to the owner of such industrial unit which have been approved and registered to undertake expansion and/or diversification programme as per para 15 of Resolution No. 13730, dated the 1st September, 1986 of the Department of Industries, Government of Bihar, subject to following conditions :- (a) The benefit of tax-free purchase of raw materials shall be available only for the additional portion of purchase which are required directly as a result of expansion and/or diversification. (b) ................... 2. (b) ................... 2. This benefit shall be available for a period of five years from the date the unit started its production as a result of diversification and/or expansion. 3. This notification shall remain in force till the 31st August, 1991. 4. ..................." 4. It would appear that while S.O. 791 contemplates and provides for giving benefit of tax exemption to newly set up industrial units going into production on or after September 1, 1986, S.O. 793 contemplates and provides for tax exemption to such old existing units which have been approved and registered to undertake expansion and/or diversification as per paragraph 15 of the Resolution No. 13730 dated September 1, 1986. In either case the benefit is available for a period of five years from the date the unit goes into production in the case of new units, and in the case of old units, from the date the unit start production as a result of diversification and/or expansion. It may be noted here that while in terms of S.O. 791 exemption can be claimed with respect to industrial units going into production on or after September 1, 1986, under S.O. 793 the benefit is available only to those industrial units which have adopted the expansion/diversification after necessary approval and registration by the Industries Department on or after September 1, 1986. 5. From paragraph 9 of the writ petition it appears that Mikki Writ Works, i.e., the petitioner-unit was initially established as a manufacturing unit in 1978. It undertook its first expansion/diversification after the necessary approval of the Industries Department in 1988. The expanded/diversified unit commenced production with effect from February 15, 1988. The petitioner claimed exemption from sales tax on purchase of raw materials in accordance with the provisions of S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987 and was granted certification being Certificate No. R.N.(S)-85/SSI dated February 9, 1989. It was initially valid for a period from February 15, 1988 to August 31, 1991, but the same was later extended up to February 14, 1993, i.e., for the full period of five years. The petitioner undertook a second expansion/diversification in 1990 after seeking necessary approval by the Industries Department and commenced production as a result of diversification/expansion from October 1, 1991. The petitioner undertook a second expansion/diversification in 1990 after seeking necessary approval by the Industries Department and commenced production as a result of diversification/expansion from October 1, 1991. It applied for exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials with respect to the second expanded/diversified unit also, which was granted in the prescribed form being exemption Certificate No R.N.(S)-100 dated June 17, 1993. According to the petitioner, although the said certificate was granted in terms of S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987, as it was with respect to expanded/diversified portion of the old existing unit, by mistake, in place of S.O. 793, S.O. 791 dated September 10, 1987 was mentioned therein. 6. On June 17, 1995 a memo was issued to the petitioner asking it to show cause as to why the exemption certificate No. R.N.(S)-100 dated June 17, 1993 be not cancelled and why it should not obtain a new registration certificate under the provisions of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. The petitioner filed show cause on June 27, 1995. By the impugned order dated July 12, 1995/August 4, 1995 however, the show cause was not accepted and the said exemption certificate was cancelled. 7. According to the petitioner as an old existing unit going in for expansion/diversification after necessary approval of the Industries Department, it is entitled to tax exemption under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987 on purchase of raw materials and having been granted the certificate thereunder the respondents had no jurisdiction to review the order, much less without the sanction of the Commissioner under section 32 of the Finance Act, and/or cancel the same. According to the respondents, the petitioner has already availed the benefit of the tax-free purchase of the raw materials under S.O. 793 for full period of five years from February 15, 1988 to February 14, 1993. And as admittedly the petitioner is an old industrial unit had gone into production in 1978 itself it was not entitled to exemption under S.O. 791 which provides fro such benefits to only new industrial units going in production on or after September 1, 1986. According to the respondents further, after Industries Department permitted expansion/diversification the petitioner obtained a new registration number, namely, R.N.(S)-1207(R). According to the respondents further, after Industries Department permitted expansion/diversification the petitioner obtained a new registration number, namely, R.N.(S)-1207(R). The unit, no doubt, went into production on November 21, 1990, i.e., after cut-off date, i.e., September 1, 1986, but, as a matter of fact, it is the expanded unit of the old existing unit which had already gone into production prior to the said cut off date and, therefore, cannot be called a new industrial unit. The stand of the petitioner in this regard is that in terms of rule 14 of the Bihar Sales Tax Supplementary (Deferment of Tax) Rules, 1990, effective from January 30, 1990, an industrial unit opting for scheme of deferred payment of tax is to be treated as separate entity for the purpose of sales tax registration and it is by virtue of the said provision that the unit in question was registered as a separate new unit bearing Registration No. R.N.(S)-1207(R). Therefore, the facts that after Industries Department permitted expansion/diversification the petitioner obtained a new registration number, cannot be interpreted against it. According to the petitioner further, S.O. 791 was wrongly mentioned in the exemption certificate in question, i.e., Certificate No. R.N.(S)-100 dated June 17, 1993; instead, S.O. 793 should have been mentioned. In other words, according to the petitioner, it never claimed benefit of tax-free purchase of raw materials while applying for exemption in 1991 as a new industrial unit; it claimed the exemption as an expanded unit of the old existing unit under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987. 8. It would, thus, appear that there is no dispute on facts that the petitioner-unit is an old unit which had already gone into production in 1978; that it had already been granted tax exemption on purchase of raw materials with respect to the expanded/diversified unit in 1988 and that the second time exemption was also with respect to the further expanded/diversified unit. The question is whether the petitioner is entitled to a second exemption under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987. 9. The answer to the above question, in my opinion, has to be in the negative. The tax exemption on purchase of raw materials as contemplated by the resolution dated September 1, 1986 is a one time measure. The question is whether the petitioner is entitled to a second exemption under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987. 9. The answer to the above question, in my opinion, has to be in the negative. The tax exemption on purchase of raw materials as contemplated by the resolution dated September 1, 1986 is a one time measure. The resolution contemplates giving the said benefit top both new unit going into production on or after September 1, 1986, as well as the old units, which are already in production, with respect to their expanded/diversified portion/units, subject to certain conditions, but only once. If the unit is a new industrial unit within the parameters of the aforesaid resolution, it is entitled to the said benefit. If it is an old existing unit, it still is entitled to similar benefits provided it has expanded/diversified its activities/production with the necessary approval of the Industries department, etc. But it cannot claim the benefit simultaneously as old unit and as a new unit. If it is intended to be a one time measure, it is not understandable to me as to how having already been allowed the benefit which it was entitled to being an old unit with respect to its expanded portion under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987, it could claim the same benefit, i.e., a second time exemption under S.O. 793 itself. On this reasoning and in view of the admitted case of the parties that the exemption was/is claimed with respect to the expanded unit of an old existing unit, I do not think it is necessary to go into any other question, such as, whether having availed the benefits of tax exemption with respect to expanded unit under S.O. 793 it was entitled to any such exemption with respect to a new unit under S.O. 791, as contended by the respondent, or whether mention of the wrong statutory order (S.O. 791) in the exemption certificate in question and registration of the unit as a new unit under rule 14 of the Deferment Rules, would have any material bearing, as contended by the petitioner. The argument that the respondents could not review the previous order granting exemption certificate without sanction of the Commissioner is also wholly irrelevant. 10. The argument that the respondents could not review the previous order granting exemption certificate without sanction of the Commissioner is also wholly irrelevant. 10. As indicated at the very outset, the State Government has taken policy decisions in order to give incentive to the industries in the State of Bihar and come out with resolutions from time to time. The industrial policy as contained in Resolution No. 13730 dated September 1, 1986 has fixed September 1, 1986, i.e., the date of resolution as the cut off date. As seen above, so far as tax exemption on purchase of raw materials is concerned, the benefit is available to both old and new units as on September 1, 1986. Once the claimant is granted the benefit of tax exemption under the said policy, read with the statutory orders, the right conferred by them are exhausted. It cannot claim similar type of exemption as and when it expands/diversifies its existing unit for all times to come in future. As a matter of fact, S.O. 793 lapsed on 31st August, 1991 and, therefore, the benefit conferred by that notification cannot be continued beyond that date. In other words, old unit were entitled to tax-free purchase of raw materials for use in for additional portions only up to 31st August, 1991. There is no dispute that the Resolution No. 13730 dated September 1, 1986 stands forms. I have no doubt in my mind, therefore, that the petitioner having already availed the benefit of tax exemption under S.O. 793 dated September 10, 1987 it was not entitled to second exemption either as a new unit under S.O. 791 or as an old under S.O. 793. The order of cancellation of the exemption certificate, therefore, cannot be said to be erroneous although for reasons other than those mentioned in the impugned order, as briefly indicated above. The petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to any relief. 11. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. I will however, make no order as to cost. I agree. Writ petition dismissed.