<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1316 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165785</link>
    <description>A fiscal exemption under section 39 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was available only if the prescribed conditions were strictly met, including registration of the small-scale unit with the Directorate of Cottage and Small Scale Industries. The claimant had not produced a permanent registration certificate, and the adverse cancellation order had attained finality, so the eligibility certificate and tax holiday were unavailable under the 1994 regime. The later MSME Development Act, 2006 did not displace the statutory requirements governing the claim, because entitlement had to be tested under the 1994 Act and its rules. The rejection of exemption was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=362111" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1316 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165785</link>
      <description>A fiscal exemption under section 39 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was available only if the prescribed conditions were strictly met, including registration of the small-scale unit with the Directorate of Cottage and Small Scale Industries. The claimant had not produced a permanent registration certificate, and the adverse cancellation order had attained finality, so the eligibility certificate and tax holiday were unavailable under the 1994 regime. The later MSME Development Act, 2006 did not displace the statutory requirements governing the claim, because entitlement had to be tested under the 1994 Act and its rules. The rejection of exemption was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>