https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158942 In proceedings on exemption under section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the Court held that relief could not be denied merely because the lease deed was not registered where production had begun before 6 March 1986, and the 1990 amendment removed that basis of disqualification. It also held that later-produced generator vouchers could not sustain rejection when the generator was purchased after the exemption application and the material was produced in review. Further, a closure of more than six months did not forfeit exemption already earned for the period of actual continuous operation, so the unit remained entitled at least up to 31 March 1986. The impugned orders were quashed. en-us Mon, 18 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 15:45:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158942 In proceedings on exemption under section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the Court held that relief could not be denied merely because the lease deed was not registered where production had begun before 6 March 1986, and the 1990 amendment removed that basis of disqualification. It also held that later-produced generator vouchers could not sustain rejection when the generator was purchased after the exemption application and the material was produced in review. Further, a closure of more than six months did not forfeit exemption already earned for the period of actual continuous operation, so the unit remained entitled at least up to 31 March 1986. The impugned orders were quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 18 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158942