<?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 (10) TMI 622 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161775</link>
    <description>Withdrawal of a sales tax exemption by legislative notification was upheld because promissory estoppel failed without a clear promise and proved reliance, and the exemption had been obtained on misrepresentation. Legitimate expectation also failed because the rescission formed part of a public-interest policy change to augment State revenue. The Government was held competent to rescind the exemption under the enabling sales tax provision read with the General Clauses Act, and no prior notice, hearing, or waiver could defeat a legislative act. The common challenge to the rescission was therefore dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Feb 2014 14:35:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 622 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161775</link>
      <description>Withdrawal of a sales tax exemption by legislative notification was upheld because promissory estoppel failed without a clear promise and proved reliance, and the exemption had been obtained on misrepresentation. Legitimate expectation also failed because the rescission formed part of a public-interest policy change to augment State revenue. The Government was held competent to rescind the exemption under the enabling sales tax provision read with the General Clauses Act, and no prior notice, hearing, or waiver could defeat a legislative act. The common challenge to the rescission was therefore dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>