<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (3) TMI 313 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105649</link>
    <description>Industrial Policy, 1995 sales tax exemption was construed as an incentive for genuine new industrial investment, and the implementing notifications were read in that policy context. The requirement of exclusive ownership of the factory building was held not to require ownership of the land as well, while the separate lease-based limb addressed leased premises. This interpretation was supported by the text of the first limb, which omitted any land requirement, and by the policy objective of preventing bogus or fly-by-night units from claiming incentives. As the assessee owned the factory building and had made substantial investment, the eligibility condition was satisfied and the exemption was available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 14:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 313 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105649</link>
      <description>Industrial Policy, 1995 sales tax exemption was construed as an incentive for genuine new industrial investment, and the implementing notifications were read in that policy context. The requirement of exclusive ownership of the factory building was held not to require ownership of the land as well, while the separate lease-based limb addressed leased premises. This interpretation was supported by the text of the first limb, which omitted any land requirement, and by the policy objective of preventing bogus or fly-by-night units from claiming incentives. As the assessee owned the factory building and had made substantial investment, the eligibility condition was satisfied and the exemption was available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105649</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>