https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148620 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the restriction imposed by the Commissioner on the number of goods the petitioner could purchase under section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act was unsustainable as there was no statutory provision for such restrictions. Additionally, the court determined that the date of effectiveness of an amendment in the registration certificate should be the date of application if the amendment is allowed, emphasizing the importance of clarity in specifying validity dates in the certificate. The court allowed the petition, removed the restriction on goods, and directed the effectiveness of the amendment from the application date, awarding costs to the petitioner and ordering the refund of the security deposit. en-us Wed, 11 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 May 2013 12:02:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148620 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the restriction imposed by the Commissioner on the number of goods the petitioner could purchase under section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act was unsustainable as there was no statutory provision for such restrictions. Additionally, the court determined that the date of effectiveness of an amendment in the registration certificate should be the date of application if the amendment is allowed, emphasizing the importance of clarity in specifying validity dates in the certificate. The court allowed the petition, removed the restriction on goods, and directed the effectiveness of the amendment from the application date, awarding costs to the petitioner and ordering the refund of the security deposit. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 11 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148620