<?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>2006 (6) TMI 479 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162077</link>
    <description>A time-bound tax exemption granted under the earlier Karnataka Sales Tax regime survived the transition to the Karnataka Value Added Tax regime for its unexpired portion. The later notifications expressly preserved the unavailed balance of the earlier concession, and the State could not withdraw the accrued benefit by executive action in the absence of withdrawal in law or any overriding public interest. The text states that the petitioners, having set up tourism units in reliance on the exemption, were entitled to continue receiving the remaining exemption period, and the withholding endorsement, reassessment orders, and demand notices were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:32:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 479 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162077</link>
      <description>A time-bound tax exemption granted under the earlier Karnataka Sales Tax regime survived the transition to the Karnataka Value Added Tax regime for its unexpired portion. The later notifications expressly preserved the unavailed balance of the earlier concession, and the State could not withdraw the accrued benefit by executive action in the absence of withdrawal in law or any overriding public interest. The text states that the petitioners, having set up tourism units in reliance on the exemption, were entitled to continue receiving the remaining exemption period, and the withholding endorsement, reassessment orders, and demand notices were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162077</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>