<?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>1996 (3) TMI 484 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158281</link>
    <description>An exemption notification under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act operated on satisfaction of the prescribed schedule conditions and production of an eligibility certificate from the Industries Commissioner. Once the competent authority issued that certificate on approval and recommendation of the State Level Committee, the assessing authority could not question its correctness or go behind it. The certificate remained decisive for exemption until revoked or amended by the competent authority. The assessee was therefore entitled to exemption on the inter-State sales covered by the certificate, and absence of registration under section 7(1) did not justify denial of the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:46:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=332840" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (3) TMI 484 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158281</link>
      <description>An exemption notification under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act operated on satisfaction of the prescribed schedule conditions and production of an eligibility certificate from the Industries Commissioner. Once the competent authority issued that certificate on approval and recommendation of the State Level Committee, the assessing authority could not question its correctness or go behind it. The certificate remained decisive for exemption until revoked or amended by the competent authority. The assessee was therefore entitled to exemption on the inter-State sales covered by the certificate, and absence of registration under section 7(1) did not justify denial of the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158281</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>