Honble BALIA, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties. (2). The assessee challenges the assessment order dt. 15.03.2000 (Annexure-9). (3). The assessee-petitioner has constructed a new hotel which started operation w.e.f. 1.8.98 and came within the purview of Land & Building Tax Act w.e.f. 1.4.99. On that basis notice was issued u/S. 22 for securing information about the same. The assessee claimed during the assessment proceedings that `tourism has been declared to be an industry within the State of Rajasthan by notification issued by His Excellency Governor of Rajasthan on 4.3.89 (Annexure-2). The benefits to be extended to such industry were to be made known separately. Thereafter in pursuance of declaration of Industrial Policy, 1998 published by the Govt. of Rajasthan, a notification was issued on 27.5.98 in exercise of its powers u/S. 3 read with Section 21 of Rajasthan Land & Building Tax Act, 1964 by which the minimum limit in respect of land and building used for industry upto which no tax was payable was raised to Rs. 20 lacs and thereafter rates were prescribed on the slab basis from 1% to 1.5%. This notification related only to industrial land and buildings. Apart from prescribing separate rates for levying tax under the Rajasthan Land & Building Tax Act in relation to industrial land and buildings, it further exempted land and building of new industrial unit, which came into existence after 1.4.98 by commencing commercial production thereafter, but prior to 31.03.2003. Said industrial land and buildings were exempted from payment of tax for a period of four years after the commencement of the commercial production. (4). It was claimed by the assessee that since the tax liability on land and building commenced only after 1.4.98 and the new hotel building which is a tourism related project, is a part of the tourism industry. It started operation w.e.f. 1.8.98 that is to say after 1.4.98, it fulfilled the conditions of exemption under the said notification. (5). However, this plea did not find favour with the Assessing Officer and he levied the tax on the hotel building as any other building. It started operation w.e.f. 1.8.98 that is to say after 1.4.98, it fulfilled the conditions of exemption under the said notification. (5). However, this plea did not find favour with the Assessing Officer and he levied the tax on the hotel building as any other building. As tax on the land was already subject matter of earlier assessment and one time tax having been paid in respect thereof, and on further demands having been raised the matter was sub-judice before this Court, no assessment of land was made separately and that part of contention is not subject matter of this petition. (6). Show cause notice was issued on 18.7.2000 and recovery of the demand was stayed. Thereafter reply and rejoinder both have been filed and now the matter is before this Court for final hearing. (7). The preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order, this Court ought not to interfere in the matter. (8). It is true that right of appeal against the assessee has been provided under the Act but it is equally true that this appeal is subject to the payment of entire amount of tax demanded and looking to the question and amount involved this right of appeal coupled with the nature of contentions raised in my opinion the remedy under the Act cannot be considered to be an efficacious alternative remedy particularly keeping in view that no question of fact is in dispute and matter relates purely to the interpretation of notification issued by the Govt. and decision of this issue will give quietus to like dispute likely to be raised time and again about applicability of the notification to hotels or any other tourism related project which is of general importance, it is not a fit case to be non-suited solely on the ground of alternative remedy provided under the Act, which is very onerous. (9). On merit of the issue it is not in dispute now that hotel in question has commenced operation only on 1.8.98 that is to say after the issuance of notifications dated 4.3.89 (Annexure-2) and 27.5.98 (Annexure-12). The two notifications in question reads as under: NOTIFICATION DT. 4.3.89 (ANNEXURE-2) GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIES (GR.I) DEPARTMENT No. F. 12(4) IInd/85 Jaipur dt. On merit of the issue it is not in dispute now that hotel in question has commenced operation only on 1.8.98 that is to say after the issuance of notifications dated 4.3.89 (Annexure-2) and 27.5.98 (Annexure-12). The two notifications in question reads as under: NOTIFICATION DT. 4.3.89 (ANNEXURE-2) GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIES (GR.I) DEPARTMENT No. F. 12(4) IInd/85 Jaipur dt. 14.3.89 NOTIFICATION The Governor of Rajasthan is pleased to declare tourism as an Industry in the State of Rajasthan with effect from the date of issue of this notification. A further notification regarding conditions of eligibility quantum of assistance, etc. to be provided to the tourism industry units will be issued separately. Sd/- (Hari Mohan Mathur) Secretary to the Government NOTIFICATION DT. 27.5.98 (ANNEXURE-12) Hkkx- 4 ¼x½ mi[k.M ¼1½ jkT; ljdkj rFkk vU; jkT; izkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk tkjh fd;s x;s dkuwuh vknsk rFkk vf/klwpuk, foRr foHkkx ¼dj vuqHkkx½ vf/klwpuk t;iqj ebZ 27] 1998 ,l vks 60 jktLFkku Hkwfe ,oa Hkou dj vf/kfu;e 1964 ¼1964 dk jkt vf/kfu;e la[;k 18½ dh /kkjk 3 o 21 ds }kjk iznRr kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, jkT; ljdkj 1-4-98 ls dj ns; vkS|ksfxd Hkwfe o Hkouksa ds cktkj ewY; ij dj dh njsa fuEukuqlkj r; djrh gSA vkS|ksfxd Hkwfe o Hkouksa ij% 1- Hkwfe ,oa Hkou cktkj ewY; ds izFke 20 yk[k ij kwU; 2- Hkwfe o Hkou cktkj ewY; ds vxys 6 yk[k ij 1 izfr 3- Hkwfe ,oa Hkou cktkj ewY; ds vxys 26 yk[k ls vf/kd ij 1@5 izfr ijUrq ;g fd fnukad 1-4-98 ls ns; ubZ vkS|ksfxd bdkbZ;ksa ds lEcU/k esa muds okf.kfT;d mRiknu izkjEHk gksus dh frfFk ls vkxkeh pkj o"kZ ckn ns; gksxk ckrZ fd bu bdkbZ;ksa ds }kjk okf.kfT;d mRiknu 31 ekpZ] 2003 ls iwoZ izkjEHk dj fy;k tkos] ijUrq ;g vkSj Hkh fd fjDr vkS|ksfxd Hkw[k.M ij vf/klwpuk la[;k i`- 8¼14½ foRr@dj-vuq@97 fnukad 1-4-97 ds vuqlkj gh dj ns; gksxkA uksV ;s vkS|ksfxd Hkwfe tks jhdks }kjk vkS|ksfxd iz;kstukFkZ vFkok euksjatu ikdZ gsrq vkoafVr dh x;h gS] dk ewY;kadu jhdks }kjk rRle; iznRr vkoUVu njksa ds vk/kkj ij fd;k tk;sxkA jkT;iky dh vkKk ls] ¼fouksn diwj½ mi kklu lfpo ¼la[;k ,Q-17 ¼11½ for@dj-vuq@99½ (10). On the basis of the above two notifications, it is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that though by notification dated 4.3.89 the Governor did declare tourism to be an industry within the State of Rajasthan, however, no exemption or benefits flew from such notification. Under the notification conditions of eligibility, quantum of assistance to be provided to the tourism industry by issuing separate orders. No such separate order having been issued, merely on the basis of above-mentioned notification under Land and Building Tax Act, the tourism cannot be treated to be an industry. (11). This contention fails to impress, while not detailing the benefits to be extended to tourism projects as an industrial project, it was left to be declared independently. But no specific mode for issuing such direction was envisaged. If any benefits were to be extended to all industries generally, because of notification dt. 4.3.89, the `tourism was to be treated as an industry within the meaning of such notification, unless intention to contrary (for not extending such benefit to tourism) is manifested expressly or necessary implication. (12). I am of the opinion that in view of the fact that specific notification has been issued under the Land & Building Tax Act specifying separate rates for industrial building the condition that no separate notification has been issued for extending any benefit to tourism industry independently in pursuance of notification dated 4.03.1989, is of little relevance. It is to be noticed that word `industry has not been defined under the Land & Building Tax Act, so as to deviate from its import in generic sense. In its generic sence tourism is to be treated as industry within Rajasthan is manifest from the notification dated 3.4.89. (13). It is true that by Annexure-2 notification dated 4.03.1989 no particular benefit has been extended to tourism as an industry except recognising tourism as an industry. What benefits or exemptions or concessions are extended to any investment made in tourism industry will depend on term of various schemes and enactments but the fact remains that unless specified otherwise, whenever any reference in any enactment or notification relating to an industry in generic sense is made since the said notification, such reference to `industry ipso facto would include reference to any establishment forming part of tourism as an industry in view of notification dated 4.3.89. The notification issued under Land & Building Tax Act on 27.05.1998 is a separate notification extending certain concessions in the matter of levy of tax under Land & Building Tax Act to each and every industry situated within the State of Rajasthan. That being so tourism being considered to be an industry any building forming part of the industry of tourism will be subject to that notification. (14). Moreover there is unmistakably clear evidence emanating from the contemporary documents in pursuance of which this exemption under Land & Building Tax has been issued that the notification dt. 27.5.98 extends to tourism related project by treating it to be an industry and hotel building being tourism related project comes under its umbrella subject to fulfilment of other conditions. The Industrial Policy, 1998, a document published by the State of Rajasthan, contained specific para 27 disclosing that tourism for the purpose of Industrial Policy has been considered to be industry to provide its growth a positive thrust. Para 27 of the Industrial Policy reads as under: Para 27 : ``Government of Rajasthan vide Notification No. F. 12(4) Ind/I/85 dated 4 March, 1989 have declared tourism as an industry. Several concessions including capital investment subsidy are being granted to the tourism projects. A special Committee headed by Principal Secretary Finance shall be set up to monitor the complete operationalization of Governments intent in this regard and to ensure that the declaration of tourism as an industry is fulfilled in letter and spirit. This Committee would also deal with the imperative of upgradation of infrastructure, conservation of monuments, upkeep of museums etc. in order to give a further fillip to tourism industry. Other members of the Committee would be; (1) Secretary Tourism (2) Commissioner Industries (3) MD, RIICO, (4) Commissioner Investment & NRIs (5) ED, RFC, (6) Member (T & D) of RSEB and (7) Director Tourism who would be the Member Secretary. This Committee would meet once in every two months. (15). This makes it clear that the above document did intend to issue guideline under Industrial Policy by considering tourism as an industry by making specific reference to earlier notification dt. 3.4.89 under this Policy statement in envisaging the incentives and concessions under various taxing statute has been dealt with separately. Para 28.7 deals with land and buildings. (15). This makes it clear that the above document did intend to issue guideline under Industrial Policy by considering tourism as an industry by making specific reference to earlier notification dt. 3.4.89 under this Policy statement in envisaging the incentives and concessions under various taxing statute has been dealt with separately. Para 28.7 deals with land and buildings. It is relevant to notice sub-paras 1 and 3 of Para 28.7 of the Industrial Policy which read as under: Para 28.7 : LAND AND BUILDING TAX ACT : Para 28.7.1: ``The exemption limit for industries in respect of Land and Buildings tax has been raised from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 20 lakhs. This would also be applicable to tourism related projects. Para 28.7.3: ``New Industrial Units will be exempted from payment of Land and Buildings tax for a period of four years from the date of production. (16). These two provisions made in the Industrial Policy, 1998 leave no room of doubt of that notification under Land & Buildings Tax Act on 27.05.1998 gives effect to declaration in Industrial Policy unequivocally which in terms is to extend the benefit of notification of such concession to the tourism related project also. There is no contention that hotel in question is not a tourist related project. (17). Therefore, irresistible conclusion is that a hotel being a tourism related project for extending amenities to tourists and part of tourism activity, it cannot but be treated as an Industrial building governed by notification dated 27.05.1998 read with notification dt. 4.3.89 both in the matter of rates applicable to such buildings and if fulfills the other conditions namely commencement of commercial operation after 1.4.98 but before 31.03.2003 is eligible for the exemption from tax for a period of four years. (18). In view thereof this petition is allowed. The impugned assessment order Annexure-9 and demand in pursuance thereof are quashed. (19). There shall be no order as to costs.