<?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>1968 (9) TMI 112 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160376</link>
    <description>Cotton fabrics produced on power-looms owned by a co-operative society remained within the exemption notifications even when manufactured for a third party under a weaving arrangement. The Court applied the plain language of the taxing exemption and held that, because the notification did not restrict the benefit to fabrics produced for the society&#039;s own account, such a limitation could not be implied. The controlling principle was that exemption notifications in tax law must be construed strictly according to their words, and the benefit cannot be denied by adding words not expressed or necessarily implied. The assessee was therefore entitled to excise exemption for the relevant period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 112 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160376</link>
      <description>Cotton fabrics produced on power-looms owned by a co-operative society remained within the exemption notifications even when manufactured for a third party under a weaving arrangement. The Court applied the plain language of the taxing exemption and held that, because the notification did not restrict the benefit to fabrics produced for the society&#039;s own account, such a limitation could not be implied. The controlling principle was that exemption notifications in tax law must be construed strictly according to their words, and the benefit cannot be denied by adding words not expressed or necessarily implied. The assessee was therefore entitled to excise exemption for the relevant period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160376</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>