<?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>2003 (8) TMI 488 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161620</link>
    <description>Interim restraint on a fiscal statute requires a prima facie showing of constitutional invalidity or jurisdictional defect; a stay granted only on balance of convenience was unjustified and was set aside. In indirect tax matters, the balance of convenience ordinarily favours the revenue because any levy ultimately upheld may cause irrecoverable loss to the State exchequer. The prospective amendment to section 39 was not barred by promissory estoppel and did not defeat any accrued vested right, as the Legislature could withdraw or modify a tax concession in accordance with the statutory scheme and public interest. The Tribunal was directed to decide the main challenge on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 18:04:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344794" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 488 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161620</link>
      <description>Interim restraint on a fiscal statute requires a prima facie showing of constitutional invalidity or jurisdictional defect; a stay granted only on balance of convenience was unjustified and was set aside. In indirect tax matters, the balance of convenience ordinarily favours the revenue because any levy ultimately upheld may cause irrecoverable loss to the State exchequer. The prospective amendment to section 39 was not barred by promissory estoppel and did not defeat any accrued vested right, as the Legislature could withdraw or modify a tax concession in accordance with the statutory scheme and public interest. The Tribunal was directed to decide the main challenge on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161620</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>