<?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>1994 (10) TMI 289 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158192</link>
    <description>The court held that the petitioner, engaged in manufacturing A.C. pipes, was entitled to sales tax exemption benefits under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act. Despite subsequent exclusion from eligibility, the court applied the doctrine of promissory estoppel, protecting the petitioner&#039;s vested rights to the exemption for the entire eligible period. The judgment affirmed the petitioner&#039;s entitlement to the benefits, emphasizing the principle that withdrawal of benefits should not impact rights already vested. The recovery notice was quashed, and authorities were restrained from withdrawing the sales tax incentive scheme benefits from the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2013 11:29:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=330129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 289 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158192</link>
      <description>The court held that the petitioner, engaged in manufacturing A.C. pipes, was entitled to sales tax exemption benefits under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act. Despite subsequent exclusion from eligibility, the court applied the doctrine of promissory estoppel, protecting the petitioner&#039;s vested rights to the exemption for the entire eligible period. The judgment affirmed the petitioner&#039;s entitlement to the benefits, emphasizing the principle that withdrawal of benefits should not impact rights already vested. The recovery notice was quashed, and authorities were restrained from withdrawing the sales tax incentive scheme benefits from the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>