<?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>2001 (7) TMI 1260 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160866</link>
    <description>A new cement unit under the amended Rajasthan New Sales Tax Incentive Scheme, 1989 is not confined to the general concessional treatment in item 1-E of Annexure C if it independently satisfies the definition of a prestigious unit. The scheme treated item 1-E as the general entry for new cement units, while item 4 and other special entries continued to operate for higher-category units with distinct policy objectives. Because the amended scheme did not expressly exclude cement units from item 4, unlike specific exclusions elsewhere, the special incentive remained available. The earlier cement precedent was distinguished as arising under the pre-amendment regime.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2013 17:24:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 1260 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160866</link>
      <description>A new cement unit under the amended Rajasthan New Sales Tax Incentive Scheme, 1989 is not confined to the general concessional treatment in item 1-E of Annexure C if it independently satisfies the definition of a prestigious unit. The scheme treated item 1-E as the general entry for new cement units, while item 4 and other special entries continued to operate for higher-category units with distinct policy objectives. Because the amended scheme did not expressly exclude cement units from item 4, unlike specific exclusions elsewhere, the special incentive remained available. The earlier cement precedent was distinguished as arising under the pre-amendment regime.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>