<?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>2014 (11) TMI 877 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253560</link>
    <description>An incentive scheme conditioned sales tax benefits on continuous production during the eligible period and permitted condonation of production breaks only where discontinuation arose beyond management control. The State Level Committee applied the scheme and uniform policy, found the unit did not meet the prescribed conditions for condonation, and therefore denied incentives. The earlier direction for reconsideration required an objective assessment and did not bar reliance on the scheme conditions themselves. On judicial review, no arbitrariness, perversity, or illegality was identified, so constitutional interference under Article 226 was not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:24:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=369573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 877 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253560</link>
      <description>An incentive scheme conditioned sales tax benefits on continuous production during the eligible period and permitted condonation of production breaks only where discontinuation arose beyond management control. The State Level Committee applied the scheme and uniform policy, found the unit did not meet the prescribed conditions for condonation, and therefore denied incentives. The earlier direction for reconsideration required an objective assessment and did not bar reliance on the scheme conditions themselves. On judicial review, no arbitrariness, perversity, or illegality was identified, so constitutional interference under Article 226 was not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>