<?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>2008 (12) TMI 697 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163955</link>
    <description>Under Rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, once an industrial unit is treated as eligible for exemption and the authorities act on that basis, the benefit cannot be curtailed merely because the unit&#039;s product is later placed in the negative list by notification, unless the rule clearly authorises such restriction. Rule 28A(2)(f) links eligibility to the scheme conditions, while Rule 28A(4)(a) governs the period of exemption or deferment from commercial production or from the entitlement certificate. The commentary states that limiting the exemption only to investments made up to the notification date was unsustainable and that the restriction was quashed, with fresh determination directed according to law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 697 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163955</link>
      <description>Under Rule 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, once an industrial unit is treated as eligible for exemption and the authorities act on that basis, the benefit cannot be curtailed merely because the unit&#039;s product is later placed in the negative list by notification, unless the rule clearly authorises such restriction. Rule 28A(2)(f) links eligibility to the scheme conditions, while Rule 28A(4)(a) governs the period of exemption or deferment from commercial production or from the entitlement certificate. The commentary states that limiting the exemption only to investments made up to the notification date was unsustainable and that the restriction was quashed, with fresh determination directed according to law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163955</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>