https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160700 Rule 28A was construed purposively to protect the exemption incentive scheme while preserving revenue security, so the absence of an express bar on changing the mode of security at renewal meant a surety bond could be accepted instead of a bank guarantee, subject to verification of genuineness and adequacy. On that interpretation, cancellation of the exemption certificate solely because the bank guarantee was not renewed was treated as too technical and unsustainable, and the appellate orders based on the same reasoning could not stand. The competent authority was left to examine the surety bond on its merits and in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Dec 2013 12:30:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160700 Rule 28A was construed purposively to protect the exemption incentive scheme while preserving revenue security, so the absence of an express bar on changing the mode of security at renewal meant a surety bond could be accepted instead of a bank guarantee, subject to verification of genuineness and adequacy. On that interpretation, cancellation of the exemption certificate solely because the bank guarantee was not renewed was treated as too technical and unsustainable, and the appellate orders based on the same reasoning could not stand. The competent authority was left to examine the surety bond on its merits and in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160700