<?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>2008 (3) TMI 462 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106109</link>
    <description>Exemption provisions under rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules must be strictly construed, and an eligibility certificate confined to monochrome monitors and black-and-white TV sets could not be expanded without examining the rule&#039;s express limits on product identity, capital investment and the distinction between new units and expansion or diversification. The High Court had not addressed those statutory constraints and relied on irrelevant considerations, so the matter required fresh determination on the true scope of the rule. The appeal was allowed, the High Court judgment was set aside, and the writ petition was restored for decision afresh in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 462 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106109</link>
      <description>Exemption provisions under rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules must be strictly construed, and an eligibility certificate confined to monochrome monitors and black-and-white TV sets could not be expanded without examining the rule&#039;s express limits on product identity, capital investment and the distinction between new units and expansion or diversification. The High Court had not addressed those statutory constraints and relied on irrelevant considerations, so the matter required fresh determination on the true scope of the rule. The appeal was allowed, the High Court judgment was set aside, and the writ petition was restored for decision afresh in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106109</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>