<?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>2011 (4) TMI 1080 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211696</link>
    <description>A sales tax deferral scheme under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was construed to operate from the earlier of reaching the base production volume or the base sales volume, where the circular issued under statutory power clarified the scheme consistently with its text and purpose. The circular bound departmental authorities, and the Revenue could not disregard its own clarification. On that interpretation, the assessee qualified for deferral on excess sales, and the contrary departmental view was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2025 14:13:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1080 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211696</link>
      <description>A sales tax deferral scheme under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was construed to operate from the earlier of reaching the base production volume or the base sales volume, where the circular issued under statutory power clarified the scheme consistently with its text and purpose. The circular bound departmental authorities, and the Revenue could not disregard its own clarification. On that interpretation, the assessee qualified for deferral on excess sales, and the contrary departmental view was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>