<?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>1995 (1) TMI 392 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174173</link>
    <description>The Divisional Level Committee lacked jurisdiction to cancel or modify an eligibility certificate issued under Section 4-A of the D.P. Sales Tax Act after insertion of sub-section (3), because that power vested in the Commissioner, Sales Tax. An exemption certificate originally granted for five years could not validly be reduced to three years by the Committee, so the impugned order was unsustainable and liable to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2015 15:39:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399535" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 392 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174173</link>
      <description>The Divisional Level Committee lacked jurisdiction to cancel or modify an eligibility certificate issued under Section 4-A of the D.P. Sales Tax Act after insertion of sub-section (3), because that power vested in the Commissioner, Sales Tax. An exemption certificate originally granted for five years could not validly be reduced to three years by the Committee, so the impugned order was unsustainable and liable to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>