<?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>2005 (11) TMI 447 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162110</link>
    <description>For expansion projects under G.O. Ms. No. 108 dated 20.05.1996, &quot;base turnover&quot; is defined by the scheme itself as the best production achieved during the preceding three years or the maximum capacity expected to be achieved, whichever is higher. The later order was treated as a complete incentive code, so the earlier definitions in G.O. Ms. No. 386 and the clarification in G.O. Ms. No. 75 were not carried forward. The expression was not read as monetary turnover linked to local sales, and no additional condition requiring a prescribed local sales level could be imported into the scheme. Sales tax deferment could not therefore be denied on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:19:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 447 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162110</link>
      <description>For expansion projects under G.O. Ms. No. 108 dated 20.05.1996, &quot;base turnover&quot; is defined by the scheme itself as the best production achieved during the preceding three years or the maximum capacity expected to be achieved, whichever is higher. The later order was treated as a complete incentive code, so the earlier definitions in G.O. Ms. No. 386 and the clarification in G.O. Ms. No. 75 were not carried forward. The expression was not read as monetary turnover linked to local sales, and no additional condition requiring a prescribed local sales level could be imported into the scheme. Sales tax deferment could not therefore be denied on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>