JUDGMENT SACHCHIDANAND JHA, J. 1. The dispute in this writ petition relates to the grant of the benefits of the deferred payment of sales tax in terms of the Industrial Policy Resolution of the Government of Bihar dated September 6, 1989 and the Bihar Sales Tax Supplementary (Deferment of Tax) Rules, 1990. 2. In order to accelerate the pace of industrialisation in the State, the Government of Bihar has taken policy decisions giving incentives of different kinds from time to time. The Industrial Policy of 1986 provided for two benefits relating to sales tax, (a) exemption from payment of tax on purchase of raw materials and/or set-off of the liability of tax paid on purchase of raw materials, and (b) interest-free sales tax loans. This was replaced by Deferment of Sales Tax Scheme in the Industrial Policy of 1989, referred to above. In order to give statutory effect to the provisions regarding deferment of sales tax, the State Government framed the Bihar Sales Tax Supplementary (Deferment of Tax) Rules, 1990 (hereinafter called "the Deferment Rules") which came into effect from January 30, 1990. 3. Rule 5 of the Deferment Rules provides that the State Government may permit an industrial unit to defer the payment of tax payable under the Bihar Finance Act for a period of five years from the date of commencement of commercial production (in certain cases the period of deferment is seven years). The amount payable under the said Act but so deferred shall be paid within a period of ten years in the manner laid down in section 6. In terms of section 7 an industrial unit eligible for the claim of deferred payment of tax, is required to apply and obtain a certificate of eligibility. Rule 14 provides for separate registration of such industrial units. 4. By order as contained in annexure 20 the State Level Committee, constituted under the said Rules, has rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of the benefits of the deferment scheme on April 22, 1998. Rule 14 provides for separate registration of such industrial units. 4. By order as contained in annexure 20 the State Level Committee, constituted under the said Rules, has rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of the benefits of the deferment scheme on April 22, 1998. Earlier on August 26, 1994, by order contained in annexure 22, the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Urban Circle, Jamshedpur, had directed the petitioner to produce the registration certificate [JU 0257(c)] issued for the cement division on July 27, 1993 for its cancellation, and to get the existing registration certificate JU 1(c) amended by including cement and clinkers in the description of the goods in the, certificate. The petitioner seeks quashing of the said two orders and a mandamus to consider its claim for grant of the benefits of the deferment scheme on merit afresh. 5. It is not in dispute that in terms of rule 14 of the Deferment Rules, registration of an industrial unit is a condition precedent for seeking for benefit of the deferment of sales tax. It is, however, contended that when the petitioner filed the application for separate registration of its cement division under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, the same was rejected on May 21, 1994 on the ground that it was part and parcel of TISCO and, instead, the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes directed the petitioner to get its original registration certificate issued under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act amended which was eventually done under protest. 6. It would appear that the application for the grant of the benefits of the deferred payment of sales tax has also been rejected chiefly on the same ground, namely, that it is a part of the TISCO which is a registered dealer under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act in whose original registration certificate cement division has been included by way of amendment, and hence cannot be recognised as a separate entity. 7. It is an admitted position, as indicated above, that separate registration of any industrial unit seeking the benefit of the deferred payment of sales tax is a must and, therefore, so long as the order rejecting the application for registration stands, the petitioner cannot be entitled to such benefits and the reason assigned for denying the same cannot be said to be erroneous. This gives rise to the question as to whether rejection of the application fox separate registration was correct and according to law. 8. Rule 14 around witch the controversy revolves may be quoted at this stage : "14. Industrial unit to be a separate entity. - An industrial unit opting for the scheme of deferred payment of tax shall be a separate entity for the purpose of sales tax registration, notwithstanding anything contained in the rules and consequently every such industrial unit shall obtain a separate registration certificate covering the business activity in respect of which it is opting for the scheme of deferred payment of tax. An industrial unit shall not be entitled to carry on any other business activity other than the one in respect of which it is entitled to the benefit of the scheme of deferred payment of tax under the said certificate of eligibility. The industrial unit shall also submit a consolidated return in respect of all the places of its business in respect of which it has availed of the benefit of the scheme of deferred payment of tax to the commercial taxes authority from whom it has obtained the certificate of eligibility." The term "industrial unit' has been defined under rule 2(iv) of the said Rules as follows : "(iv) Industrial unit means and includes, - (a) a new industrial unit established in the State of Bihar by a dealer registered under the Act and commencing commercial production on or after 1st April, 1989; (b) an existing industrial unit undertaking expansion; (c) a sick unit undertaking rehabilitation or revival. Explanation. - For the purpose of these rules an industrial unit shall be an industrial unit registered/licensed by Govenment of Bihar or Government of India." 9. Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that there is nothing in the definition of the term "industrial unit" to prohibit a company from establishing a new industrial unit and expand its area of business. He argued that if an existing industrial unit undertaking expansion can be called "industrial unit" and be allowed the benefits of deferment scheme with respect to the expanded unit, there is no reason why an existing company should be denied similar benefits with respect to a new unit merely because it has been established under the penumbra of that company. He argued that if an existing industrial unit undertaking expansion can be called "industrial unit" and be allowed the benefits of deferment scheme with respect to the expanded unit, there is no reason why an existing company should be denied similar benefits with respect to a new unit merely because it has been established under the penumbra of that company. He submitted that the rules do not make any distinction between small and big companies and having regard to the object of accelerated growth of industries underlying the Industrial Policy Resolution for securing which the Deferment Rules have been framed, if the establishment of a new unit is likely to subserve the said object, the benefits of the deferred payment of sales tax scheme should be made available to such new industrial units irrespective of the status of the company which owns that unit in the market just as existing industrial units are being allowed those benefits with respect to their expanded unit. 10. I find substance in the contentions of the counsel. I may add that as per the explanation appended to the definition clause, every industrial unit registered/licensed by the Government of Bihar or the Government of India is to be treated as an industrial unit for the purpose of the Deferment Rules. It is the definite case of the petitioner that it has obtained industrial licence for setting up two cement plants at Sonadih in the district of Raipur in the State of Madhya Pradesh and Jajobera, Jamshedpur, in the district of East Singhbhum in the State of Bihar for manufacture of Portland slag cement vide letter No. C/L-94(91) of the Government of India; Ministry of Industry, and Registration No. 1627(84)/IL/MRTP/SES dated April 25, 1991. I am inclined to think, in the circumstances, that by reason of the said licence/registration granted by the Government of India the cement division of the petitioner-company fulfils the qualification for being called "industrial unit" within the meaning of rule 2(iv) of the Deferment Rules and the respondents have no option but to treat it as such, and consider its claim for grant of the benefits of the deferred payment of sales tax if it fulfils other conditions on merit. 11. This takes me to the interpretation of rule 14. 11. This takes me to the interpretation of rule 14. The essence of rule 14, as is evident from its heading, is that "industrial unit" shall be treated as a separate entity (for the purpose of the Rules) requiring separate registration thereunder. It is noteworthy that the words "separate entity" are qualified by the words "for the purpose of sales tax registration". Admittedly, the only provision regarding registration (of dealers) under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, which is the relevant Act with respect to sales tax in the State of Bihar, is the one contained in section 14 of that Act. What rule 14 of the Deferment Rules further lays down is that it shall be deemed to be a separate entity for the purposes of the Rules and for the purpose of the sales tax registration and "consequently ....... obtain a separate registration certificate covering the business activity in respect of which it is opting for the scheme of the deferred payment of tax". 12. It would appear that the application for separate registration with respect to the cement division was rejected, as noted above, on the ground that it is a part of TISCO and instead, it has been included in the original registration certificate of the TISCO by way of amendment. Mr. Subramaniam submitted that the petitioner had duly applied for separate registration of the cement division as a separate industrial unit which was rejected on the ground that the cement division is part of the same concern, namely, TISCO; now it is not open to the respondents to deny the petitioner the benefit of the deferment scheme on the ground that the cement division is not registered under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. Denial of the benefits, which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to, in the circumstances, is grossly arbitrary and contrary to the avowed policy of the State to give incentives to accelerate the process of industrialisation. He referred to the applications submitted on behalf of the petitioner in response to the direction of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes asking the petitioner to produce the original registration certificate for the purpose of amendment after rejecting the application for registration with respect to the cement division. He referred to the applications submitted on behalf of the petitioner in response to the direction of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes asking the petitioner to produce the original registration certificate for the purpose of amendment after rejecting the application for registration with respect to the cement division. In one such application dated September 27, 1994 it has been stated : "It was also submitted before your goodself during the course of discussion many a times that issue of separate sales tax registration for our cement plant (which is a new industrial undertaking as defined under Act) opting for deferment of tax under rule 14 of the Bihar Sales Tax Supplementary (Deferment of Tax) Rules, 1990 is must and mandatory. Our logical and reasonable submissions have not been appreciated and your goodself has rejected our application for issue of separate sales tax registration certificate and has directed us to apply for amendments for incorporation of our cement plant as an additional place of business in our existing sales tax registration certificate No. JU-1-R issued to our main steel works. We are, as directed by you, enclosing our sales tax registration certificate No. JU-1-R in original for amendments to include 'cement plant' as an additional place of business and also to enable us to purchase all the items as per annexure at concessional rate of tax. We also request you to incorporate the following items as an additional class of products to be dealt by us : (i) Portland slag cement, and (ii) Clinker These amendments should be made effective from August 20, 1990, the date on which we had applied for amendments earlier. This application seeking for amendments in our existing sales tax registration certificate No. JU-1-R is as per your direction and is under protest without prejudice to our contention that it will not affect our right to claim benefit of deferment of tax as admissible under the appropriate law." 13. Section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 makes the registration of every dealer, liable to pay tax under section 3 or section 4 of that Act, compulsory. It cannot sell or purchase goods unless it has been granted and is in possession of a valid registration certificate issued thereunder. Section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 makes the registration of every dealer, liable to pay tax under section 3 or section 4 of that Act, compulsory. It cannot sell or purchase goods unless it has been granted and is in possession of a valid registration certificate issued thereunder. The provision regarding submission of application for registration and the grant of registration certificate, so far as relevant for the purpose of the present case, is contained in sub-section (2) of section 14 which may usefully be noticed as hereunder : "(2) Every dealer required by sub-section (1) to be in possession of a registration certificate shall apply for the same in the prescribed manner to the prescribed authority, and the said authority shall, on being satisfied that the application is in order, register the applicant and grant him a registration certificate within prescribed time in the prescribed manner and in the prescribed form specifying therein the goods or class or description of goods which the dealer sells or purchases and such other particulars as may be prescribed: Provided that no application referred to in this sub-section shall be considered and be deemed valid, unless the applicant furnishes correctly all the prescribed particulars and, such other particulars as may be required by the prescribed authority in this behalf : Provided further that where a dealer required by sub-section (1) to be in possession of a registration certificate applies for such a certificate within the prescribed time limit and in the prescribed manner and the application is otherwise valid in accordance with the first proviso of this sub-section he shall be deemed to be in possession of a valid registration certificate from the date he so applied for the purposes of exercising all the rights and performing all the duties and bearing all the liabilities under this part and the rules made thereunder : Provided also that where a dealer carries on any business of sale or purchase of goods, in violation of the express and specific provisions of any law of the State or the Union, then notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this part and without prejudice to his liability to pay tax, the prescribed authority shall refuse to grant him a registration certificate." 14. From bare perusal of the main provision of sub-section (2) it would appear that registration certificate can be granted with respect to particular goods or class or description of goods. In other words, the certificate may be issued with respect to more than one goods. It was presumably for this reason that the original certificate issued to the petitioner was amended and Portland slag cement and Clinker were added as additional class of items of products. If the petitioner were not to seek the benefit of the deferred payment of sales tax, perhaps, no exception could be taken to such amendment. However, as seen above, rule 14 of the Deferment Rules lays down that every such industrial unit opting for the scheme of deferred payment of tax shall be "a separate entity for the purposes of sales tax registration" and "consequently obtain a separate registration certificate covering the business activity in respect of which it is opting for the scheme of deferred payment of tax". As pointed out above, the only provision regarding registration of dealer under the sales tax law is the one contained in section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. Refusal on the part of the Deputy Commissioner to grant separate registration certificate with respect to the cement division, thus, virtually amounts to denial of the benefits of the deferred payment of sales tax under the Deferment Rules. Because unless the unit is registered under the Bihar Finance Act and has obtained a separate registration certificate, it cannot claim that benefit. Section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act contemplates a common registration certificate on the basis of the same registration with respect to different goods or classes or descriptions of goods. But there is nothing in section 14 or elsewhere in the Bihar Finance Act which prohibits a dealer, already in possession of a registration certificate with respect to certain specified goods or class or description of goods, from getting separate registration for other goods or class or description of goods. Had there been no such provision as contained in rule 14 of the Deferment Rules, perhaps, addition of the additional items of goods or class or description of goods would not have caused any harm or prejudice to the dealer/industrial unit. Had there been no such provision as contained in rule 14 of the Deferment Rules, perhaps, addition of the additional items of goods or class or description of goods would not have caused any harm or prejudice to the dealer/industrial unit. However, for the purpose of rule 14 of the Deferment Rules, in order to enable the industrial unit to get the benefits of the deferred payment of the sales tax, it is required to be separately registered. This is the import of the expression "and consequently obtain separate registration certificate" (with respect to the business activity for which it seeks the benefits of the deferment scheme) occurring in rule 14. Unless it qualifies as "a separate entity" and gets itself separately registered under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, it cannot get the benefits of deferred payment of tax. 15. In the circumstances, I am inclined to direct the respondents, particularly the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Urban Circle, Jamshedpur, to consider the question of grant of registration certificate with respect to the cement division of the petitioner-company under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 afresh. The question as to giving the benefit of the deferred payment of sales tax shall abide by the order to be so passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. In other words, in the event separate registration certificate is granted with respect to the cement division of the petitioner-company, its application for grant of benefit of the deferred payment of sales tax shall be considered on merit afresh. So that the matter is considered afresh from the very beginning on a clean slate, it would be appropriate to quash the two orders impugned in the writ petition as well as the order dated May 21, 1994 by which the application for registration on behalf of M/s. TISCO Ltd. (Cement Division) under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act had been rejected. 16. In the result, this writ petition is allowed, the orders as contained in annexure 20 dated April 22, 1998, annexure 22 dated August 26, 1994 and annexure 25 dated May 21, 1994 are quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the matter afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove and in accordance with law at the earliest. I will make no order as to cost. I agree. Writ petition allowed.