<?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 (9) TMI 606 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162616</link>
    <description>A proviso must be construed to support, not defeat, the substantive purpose of the main provision, and a literal reading that creates irrational discrimination or impossible compliance may be read down to preserve legislative intent. On that approach, section 5A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was treated as granting concessional tax treatment to registered manufacturers using industrial inputs for goods sold within the State, even where tax on the inputs had been paid at the purchase point. The first proviso was therefore read down to operate only where its condition could actually be complied with, and the concessional benefit under section 5A remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:47:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 606 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162616</link>
      <description>A proviso must be construed to support, not defeat, the substantive purpose of the main provision, and a literal reading that creates irrational discrimination or impossible compliance may be read down to preserve legislative intent. On that approach, section 5A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was treated as granting concessional tax treatment to registered manufacturers using industrial inputs for goods sold within the State, even where tax on the inputs had been paid at the purchase point. The first proviso was therefore read down to operate only where its condition could actually be complied with, and the concessional benefit under section 5A remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>