<?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 590 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159412</link>
    <description>An industrial tax exemption notification granting relief to new small-scale units was construed as a concession for a fixed period and monetary ceiling, not as a scheme that automatically reduces eligibility because tax was collected and remitted during the exemption period. The operative principle was that tax collected and paid over to Government need not be deducted from the total exemption entitlement unless the notification expressly requires such deduction. The notification was read consistently with the exemption period and ceiling conditions, and with the Board&#039;s clarification that remitted tax was not to be excluded from the eligibility computation where the statutory limits were otherwise satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 23 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 10:52:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 590 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159412</link>
      <description>An industrial tax exemption notification granting relief to new small-scale units was construed as a concession for a fixed period and monetary ceiling, not as a scheme that automatically reduces eligibility because tax was collected and remitted during the exemption period. The operative principle was that tax collected and paid over to Government need not be deducted from the total exemption entitlement unless the notification expressly requires such deduction. The notification was read consistently with the exemption period and ceiling conditions, and with the Board&#039;s clarification that remitted tax was not to be excluded from the eligibility computation where the statutory limits were otherwise satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159412</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>