<?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 (1) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158366</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act was not attracted where a diesel generating set was expressly included in the registration certificate for use in manufacture and was purchased against form C at a concessional rate. Its use to generate electricity for running plant and machinery in production fell within the contemplated registered use, and there was no allegation of any unauthorised or different use, or any misstatement by the dealer. The distinction from the cited precedent was that it concerned refusal to include the item in the certificate, not misuse after inclusion. The dealer remained entitled to the concessional rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2015 12:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158366</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act was not attracted where a diesel generating set was expressly included in the registration certificate for use in manufacture and was purchased against form C at a concessional rate. Its use to generate electricity for running plant and machinery in production fell within the contemplated registered use, and there was no allegation of any unauthorised or different use, or any misstatement by the dealer. The distinction from the cited precedent was that it concerned refusal to include the item in the certificate, not misuse after inclusion. The dealer remained entitled to the concessional rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>