<?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>2013 (12) TMI 332 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240667</link>
    <description>An eligibility certificate issued under the U.P. Trade Tax exemption scheme remained subject to statutory amendment by the competent authority, because the power under Section 4-A(3) allowed cancellation or modification after hearing. The earlier writ order established entitlement to the certificate but did not decide its validity period or bar later scrutiny of discontinuance of production, so constructive res judicata did not apply. Where production had stopped for a continuous six-month period, the governing notification was treated as satisfied by that factual discontinuance, regardless of any temporary suspension argument. The exemption period was therefore liable to curtailment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2013 06:30:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338570" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 332 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240667</link>
      <description>An eligibility certificate issued under the U.P. Trade Tax exemption scheme remained subject to statutory amendment by the competent authority, because the power under Section 4-A(3) allowed cancellation or modification after hearing. The earlier writ order established entitlement to the certificate but did not decide its validity period or bar later scrutiny of discontinuance of production, so constructive res judicata did not apply. Where production had stopped for a continuous six-month period, the governing notification was treated as satisfied by that factual discontinuance, regardless of any temporary suspension argument. The exemption period was therefore liable to curtailment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>