<?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>2002 (12) TMI 569 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161264</link>
    <description>An eligibility certificate under Rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 could be withdrawn only on the specific grounds expressly listed in the rule, including fraud, misrepresentation, concealment of material facts, closure of business, or disposal of fixed assets affecting manufacturing capacity. Non-production of a change of land use certificate from the Town and Country Planning Department was not one of those grounds. The rule was therefore construed strictly, and once the certificate had been granted, it could not be withdrawn on an additional or implied basis not authorised by the statute. The withdrawal orders were quashed as unlawful and unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:49:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 569 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161264</link>
      <description>An eligibility certificate under Rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 could be withdrawn only on the specific grounds expressly listed in the rule, including fraud, misrepresentation, concealment of material facts, closure of business, or disposal of fixed assets affecting manufacturing capacity. Non-production of a change of land use certificate from the Town and Country Planning Department was not one of those grounds. The rule was therefore construed strictly, and once the certificate had been granted, it could not be withdrawn on an additional or implied basis not authorised by the statute. The withdrawal orders were quashed as unlawful and unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161264</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>