JUDGMENT N. Kumar, J.—The assessee has preferred this appeal challenging the portion of the order passed by the revisional authority under section 15(2) of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale Therein Act, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") taking the benefit of exemption of entry tax on diesel generator set purchased by the assessee. The assessee is a medium scale unit located at Sy. Nos. 12, 14 and 15 of Kanchanahalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District, which is registered for manufacture of "sponge iron, steel ingots, steel re-rolled items and for 8MW co-generation of power". A certificate dated June 26, 2004 of the Joint Director, District Industries Centre, Hassan, showing that the assessee is eligible for entry tax exemption on plant and machinery/equipment purchased by the unit for a period of three years from May 29, 2004, was issued. The assessee filed monthly returns for the months from May 2004 to March 2005. The assessee, in the said returns, reported about the goods purchased/received from outside the local area and scheduled goods such as plant and machinery. In the said list of machinery, he also clearly showed that he has purchased DG set. In this turnover, he did not include the value of the said asset. As the certificate issued by the Joint Director, District of Industries and Commerce, Hassan did not mention anything about the diesel generating set entitling the assessee to the exemption from payment of entry tax, a proposition notice was issued calling upon him to show cause as to why entry tax may not be imposed on DG set and also why penalty should not be imposed. The assessee entered appearance, filed statement of objections and pointed out that in view of the notification issued, no entry tax is payable for DG set. However, the said objection was overruled and the demand was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal. 2. The assessee entered appearance, filed statement of objections and pointed out that in view of the notification issued, no entry tax is payable for DG set. However, the said objection was overruled and the demand was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal. 2. The appellate authority, taking note of the notification granting exemption and also a judgment of this court, held that the DG set purchased by the assessee is classifiable under machinery and is entitled to entry tax exemption on purchase and causing entry of machinery into the local area by the assessee by virtue of its unit being classified as new industrial unit by the Department of Industries and Commerce. Therefore, he deleted the tax levied on purchase of turnover of DG set and also set aside the penalty levied. The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes initiated proceedings of revision under section 15(2) of the Act and held that firstly that in the certificate issued by the Joint Director, District Industries Centre, Hassan, DG set is not mentioned, secondly, DG sets are not classifiable in terms of the notification and therefore, he set aside the order of the appellate authority as being prejudicial to the Revenue and restored the original order. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that though in the certificate issued by the Joint Director of Industries and Commerce, DG set is not specifically mentioned, it falls within the definition of "plant and machinery" and in terms of the notification, entry of production machinery and equipments directly involved in the production process, is exempted from payment of entry tax. Therefore, he submits that the order passed by the revisional authority is contrary to the said notification and law and requires to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate supported the impugned order. Therefore, he submits that the order passed by the revisional authority is contrary to the said notification and law and requires to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate supported the impugned order. The Notification No. FD.161.CET.2001(I), dated November 30, 2001, Karnataka Gazette, Extraordinary, dated November 30, 2001, which grants exemption reads as under: In exercise of the powers conferred by section 11A of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 (Karnataka Act 27 of 1979), the Government of Karnataka being of the opinion that it is necessary in public interest so to do, hereby exempts the tax payable under the said Act,-- (i) during the implementation of the project on the entry of production machinery and equipments directly involved in the production process into a local area caused by a new industrial unit subject to the condition that the benefit will be available for a maximum period of three years from the date of commencement of project implementation or the completion of the project implementation, whichever is earlier; and (ii) on the entry of raw materials, components, semi-finished goods, sub-assemblies, consumables (excluding petroleum products like, petrol, diesel, furnace oil, naphtha, and LSHS used as consumables or for captive power generation units) into a local area caused by a new industrial unit mentioned in column (2) of the table below located in the zones specified in column (3) and for the period mentioned in column (4) thereof : S. No. Type of industry Location of the industry Period of exemption 1 Tiny/small/medium and large scale industrial units Situated in Zone B specified in annexure I to Government order Three years from the date of commencement of commercial production. 5. The procedure prescribed for seeking exemption provides that the applicant shall produce the required documents. Once such document is as under : (b) the value of fixed assets in terms of land, building and plant and machinery and such other productive assets like tools, jigs and fixtures, dies, utilities like boilers, compressors, diesel generating sets, cranes, material handling equipments and such other equipments which are directly related to production purposes on the date of commencement of commercial production; Relying on this, it is contended that in the certificate issued, there is no mention about DG set and therefore, the assessee is not entitled to exemption. The exemption for payment of entry tax is by virtue of the notification as aforesaid. The said notification categorically exempts from payment of entry tax on any goods which are purchased in the implementation of the project on the entry of production machinery and equipments directly involved in the production process into a local area caused by a new industrial unit. He has also purchased machinery and equipment from outside the local area. Along with the said plant and machinery he has purchased the DG set. The DG set is a machinery and equipment which is required in the production process. It also falls within the meaning of the word "machinery" and therefore, on the face of it, the assessee is entitled to exemption from payment of entry tax in respect of the DG set. However, the procedure prescribed in the said notification provides that a certificate has to be obtained from the Joint Director of Industries and Commerce setting out the machineries to which the exemption notification applies. Diesel generating set is also one such machinery to which the exemption notification applies if it is mentioned in the certificate. However, at the same time, if the said machinery is not mentioned in the certificate to be issued, it cannot be said that assessee is not entitled to claim exemption. If diesel generating set is required in the production process and when it is purchased along with the machinery equipment, the petitioner is entitled to exemption. 6. In fact, the appellate authority has carefully considered this aspect of the matter, looked into the notification, relied on a judgment of this court and has correctly held that the assessee is entitled to exemption. The view taken by the revisional authority is too technical, contrary to the material on record and defeats the very purpose behind the issue of the notification. The benefit granted by the State to a new entrepreneur by way of exemption from payment of entry tax cannot be denied by placing such literal interpretation in so far as the procedure prescribed, ignoring the main notification which grants such exemption. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the revisional authority is illegal and cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Hence, we pass the following : ORDER Appeal is allowed. The impugned order is hereby set aside. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the revisional authority is illegal and cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Hence, we pass the following : ORDER Appeal is allowed. The impugned order is hereby set aside. The order of the appellate authority is restored. Parties to bear their own cost. Since the appeal is allowed, Misc. CVL. No. 4385/2010 filed for stay is dismissed as being infructuous.