https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162615 An industrial incentive scheme intended to promote new industries in backward areas was held not to bar subsidy or sales tax waiver merely because the shed had earlier been partly constructed by another entrepreneur and later resumed by SIPCOT and reallotted. The petitioner was treated as having acquired a new asset for establishing a new industry, and the prior partial construction was not a disqualifying condition under the scheme. The Court further noted that the only specific exclusion was second-hand machinery, and the rejection could not rest on any ground not supported by the scheme. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered under G.O. Ms. No. 500. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:43:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162615 An industrial incentive scheme intended to promote new industries in backward areas was held not to bar subsidy or sales tax waiver merely because the shed had earlier been partly constructed by another entrepreneur and later resumed by SIPCOT and reallotted. The petitioner was treated as having acquired a new asset for establishing a new industry, and the prior partial construction was not a disqualifying condition under the scheme. The Court further noted that the only specific exclusion was second-hand machinery, and the rejection could not rest on any ground not supported by the scheme. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered under G.O. Ms. No. 500. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162615