<?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>1997 (3) TMI 586 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159310</link>
    <description>A petition challenging an exemption dispute was held maintainable despite the availability of an appeal, because the matter raised a substantial question of law on the interpretation of the exemption notification and refusing review would have risked avoidable multiplicity of proceedings. On the merits, the notification applied only to a new manufacturing unit, and mere registration as a 100% export-oriented unit was not sufficient. The tribunal declined to import the definition from section 10-B of the Income-tax Act because the fiscal scheme was distinct. Exemption was therefore allowed only pro tanto for the genuinely new and separable additional 28 TPD capacity, while the existing 14 TPD capacity was excluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2013 15:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 586 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159310</link>
      <description>A petition challenging an exemption dispute was held maintainable despite the availability of an appeal, because the matter raised a substantial question of law on the interpretation of the exemption notification and refusing review would have risked avoidable multiplicity of proceedings. On the merits, the notification applied only to a new manufacturing unit, and mere registration as a 100% export-oriented unit was not sufficient. The tribunal declined to import the definition from section 10-B of the Income-tax Act because the fiscal scheme was distinct. Exemption was therefore allowed only pro tanto for the genuinely new and separable additional 28 TPD capacity, while the existing 14 TPD capacity was excluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>