https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221973 The court rejected the petitioner's claim for input tax credit for the pre-registration period under the KVAT Act, citing that the petitioner was already registered before the relevant section came into effect. The court upheld the validity of Section 15 B of the KVAT Act, emphasizing legislative discretion in setting cut-off dates for beneficial provisions and highlighting that such provisions should not reopen settled matters. The judgment underscores the importance of not interfering with legislative decisions unless arbitrariness is proven and ensures clarity in the interpretation and application of statutory provisions related to taxation laws. en-us Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Aug 2014 11:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221973 The court rejected the petitioner's claim for input tax credit for the pre-registration period under the KVAT Act, citing that the petitioner was already registered before the relevant section came into effect. The court upheld the validity of Section 15 B of the KVAT Act, emphasizing legislative discretion in setting cut-off dates for beneficial provisions and highlighting that such provisions should not reopen settled matters. The judgment underscores the importance of not interfering with legislative decisions unless arbitrariness is proven and ensures clarity in the interpretation and application of statutory provisions related to taxation laws. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221973