<?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 (2) TMI 813 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162938</link>
    <description>An assessing authority cannot ignore an exemption certificate issued by the competent screening committee and proceed on a contrary view. Where the certificate expressly grants 75 per cent exemption and requires payment of only 25 per cent tax, the taxing officer must act consistently with that certificate unless it is corrected or cancelled by the competent committee under the prescribed procedure. A notice issued on an assumption of lesser exemption is therefore beyond jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:46:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348996" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 813 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162938</link>
      <description>An assessing authority cannot ignore an exemption certificate issued by the competent screening committee and proceed on a contrary view. Where the certificate expressly grants 75 per cent exemption and requires payment of only 25 per cent tax, the taxing officer must act consistently with that certificate unless it is corrected or cancelled by the competent committee under the prescribed procedure. A notice issued on an assumption of lesser exemption is therefore beyond jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>