<?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 (2) TMI 532 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159961</link>
    <description>Under the deferment scheme in section 10F of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, financial viability is treated as an implied material condition because the deferred tax must be repayable when it matures. If the industrial unit has ceased production and there is no realistic prospect of reopening, refusal of an eligibility certificate is justified. In an application for deferment-based relief, subsequent events occurring before issuance of the certificate may be considered where they show closure, financial collapse, or inability to repay the deferred liability. The refusal of the eligibility certificate was therefore upheld on the ground of commercial non-viability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2013 11:40:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 532 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159961</link>
      <description>Under the deferment scheme in section 10F of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, financial viability is treated as an implied material condition because the deferred tax must be repayable when it matures. If the industrial unit has ceased production and there is no realistic prospect of reopening, refusal of an eligibility certificate is justified. In an application for deferment-based relief, subsequent events occurring before issuance of the certificate may be considered where they show closure, financial collapse, or inability to repay the deferred liability. The refusal of the eligibility certificate was therefore upheld on the ground of commercial non-viability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>