https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165403 An enhancement of the lump sum tax rate under the Haryana Value Added Tax regime could not operate retrospectively in the absence of enabling power. A notification issued on 8 June 2010 substituted a higher rate for an earlier period, but delegated legislation cannot impose a higher tax burden for a prior period unless the parent statute or rules expressly authorise retrospective effect. The earlier rate therefore continued to apply for the period before the notification date, and the attempted retrospective enhancement was invalid. en-us Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Apr 2017 19:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165403 An enhancement of the lump sum tax rate under the Haryana Value Added Tax regime could not operate retrospectively in the absence of enabling power. A notification issued on 8 June 2010 substituted a higher rate for an earlier period, but delegated legislation cannot impose a higher tax burden for a prior period unless the parent statute or rules expressly authorise retrospective effect. The earlier rate therefore continued to apply for the period before the notification date, and the attempted retrospective enhancement was invalid. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165403