Bharati H. Dangre, J.

The Appellant Company has filed the present Appeal assailing the concurrent findings of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Pune Division. The present Appeal raised substantial questions of law and we deem it fit to admit the same on the following questions of law.

(A) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, exemption from whole of tax under Serial No.1 of Notification No. VAT/1505/Cr 122/Taxation dated 1.4.2005 issued under Section 8(4) of Mah.VAT, 2003 is available for the entire turnover of Ratnagiri unit, despite of Chapter 14 of MVAT Act, 2002 as retrospectively amended/substituted by Mah.Act 22 of 2009 ?

(B) Whether in the facts of the circumstances, Section 93 of MVAT Act, 2002 as amended by Act 22 of 2009 is applicable to turnover of Ratnagiri unit which has already exhausted the monetary ceiling limits of exemption before 28.08.2009 being the date of coming into force Maharashtra Act 22 of 2009

(C) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of the validation and saving provision contained in Section 5 of Maharashtra Act 22 of 2009, full exemption is available for entire turnover of Ratnagiri unit, particularly when the eligibility certificate/ certificate of entitlement both dated 10.02.2003 did not contain any condition of proportionality for availing of incentives under 1993 Scheme ?

On the appeal being admitted, we have heard Shri Sridharan learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr.Sonpal appearing for the respondents and have taken up the matter for final hearing by consent of the parties.

2. The Appellant is a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act and is having its registered office in Pune. The appellant Company is engaged in the manufacturing of PVC Plastic Pipes, Pipe fittings and other allied products. The said factory is situated at Urse and is functional since 1980. In or around 1994, the appellant company set up another factory in Village Ranpar, Post Gholap, District Ratnagiri for manufacturing PVC Resins. The appellant is duly registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (for short "MVAT Act, 2002) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1966 for both the places of business separately. The dispute raised in the First and Second Appeals as well as the Appeal presented before this Court revolves around the Package Scheme of Incentives floated by the State Government and the benefits flowing from the said scheme.

3. The Appellant Company, in the year 1994, has made a fixed capital investment of Rs. 329.5 crore, thereby creating a new manufacturing factory in Ratnagiri (hereinafter referred to as "Ratnagiri Factory") for manufacturing of PVC Resins and also PVC Pipes. The said factory claimed the benefits of the Package Scheme of Incentives which was prevailing at the relevant time, known as PSI - 1988 and an eligibility certificate under Part I of the 1988 Scheme was granted to the appellant by SICOM qua its Ratnagiri unit. By virtue of the said eligibility certificate, the appellant was held eligible for maximum entitlement of sales tax incentives of Rs. 313,03,07,000/- by way of exemption. The said eligibility certificate was valid for a period of 10 years from 4th April 1994 to 30th April 1994. On the basis of the said eligibility certificate, the Sales Tax Department also issued an entitlement certificate on 25th April 1994 to the appellant and both the certificates mentioned the production capacity as 1,30,000 metric tonnes.

The said eligibility certificate expressly described the unit of the appellant as "Pioneer Unit".

In the year 1993, a new Package Scheme of Incentives substituted the existing Package Scheme of Incentives. The appellant made a further investment in its Ratnagiri unit to the tune of Rs. 208.89 crore in August 2002 and accordingly, the existing capacity of PVC Resins and extruded products like pipes, flared up from 1,30,000 metric tonnes to 2