https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157548 Rule 3(66) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 was construed to allow a registered dealer to apply for an eligibility certificate after 14 April 1983, because the 1 April 1983 proviso was read as enlarging the time available rather than defeating the claim on limitation. The provision was interpreted consistently with the incentive object of the exemption scheme, and a discriminatory or irrational reading was rejected. Rule 3(66a) was held not to displace rule 3(66); both operated in their respective fields, so a coconut oil manufacturer was not barred from seeking exemption or an eligibility certificate where the statutory conditions were otherwise satisfied. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Oct 2013 17:24:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157548 Rule 3(66) of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 was construed to allow a registered dealer to apply for an eligibility certificate after 14 April 1983, because the 1 April 1983 proviso was read as enlarging the time available rather than defeating the claim on limitation. The provision was interpreted consistently with the incentive object of the exemption scheme, and a discriminatory or irrational reading was rejected. Rule 3(66a) was held not to displace rule 3(66); both operated in their respective fields, so a coconut oil manufacturer was not barred from seeking exemption or an eligibility certificate where the statutory conditions were otherwise satisfied. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157548