https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160046 An amendment notification excluding stone crushing units from sales tax exemption could not operate retrospectively in the absence of express retrospective language. The petitioner had begun commercial production on 30 April 1988, when the earlier exemption notification remained in force, so the benefit under that notification had already accrued subject to satisfaction of the prescribed conditions. The later notification of 11 October 1990 was therefore treated as prospective from its publication date and could not withdraw the exemption already available to the petitioner. The petitioner remained entitled to exemption under the notification dated 16 October 1986. en-us Tue, 31 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Dec 2013 16:08:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160046 An amendment notification excluding stone crushing units from sales tax exemption could not operate retrospectively in the absence of express retrospective language. The petitioner had begun commercial production on 30 April 1988, when the earlier exemption notification remained in force, so the benefit under that notification had already accrued subject to satisfaction of the prescribed conditions. The later notification of 11 October 1990 was therefore treated as prospective from its publication date and could not withdraw the exemption already available to the petitioner. The petitioner remained entitled to exemption under the notification dated 16 October 1986. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 31 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160046