<?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>1998 (3) TMI 669 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160048</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Joint Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the petitioner&#039;s application for tax exemption under the Industrial Policy, 1995. Despite the petitioner&#039;s claims of establishing a new industrial unit, the court found that the unit&#039;s history of ownership continuity with a previous defaulter rendered it ineligible for exemption. The court emphasized the similarities in manufacturing processes and equipment, concluding that the unit did not meet the criteria for a new unit as defined by the policy. As a result, the application for tax exemption was denied, and no costs were awarded to the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Dec 2013 16:15:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 669 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160048</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Joint Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the petitioner&#039;s application for tax exemption under the Industrial Policy, 1995. Despite the petitioner&#039;s claims of establishing a new industrial unit, the court found that the unit&#039;s history of ownership continuity with a previous defaulter rendered it ineligible for exemption. The court emphasized the similarities in manufacturing processes and equipment, concluding that the unit did not meet the criteria for a new unit as defined by the policy. As a result, the application for tax exemption was denied, and no costs were awarded to the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>