<?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>2015 (11) TMI 262 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267453</link>
    <description>Rule 57A of the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 could not retrospectively exclude conversion of coal into coke from the statutory definition of manufacture under the parent Act. The High Court held that the Act contemplated manufacture as a process resulting in a new and different product, and that coal-to-coke conversion fell within that meaning. Delegated legislation could not amend or override the statute, nor could it retrospectively take away vested or accrued rights without clear legislative authority. The amended rule was therefore ultra vires the Act and beyond the State&#039;s rule-making power, while the factual issue concerning the date of establishment and commencement of production was left for departmental determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 14:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 262 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267453</link>
      <description>Rule 57A of the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 could not retrospectively exclude conversion of coal into coke from the statutory definition of manufacture under the parent Act. The High Court held that the Act contemplated manufacture as a process resulting in a new and different product, and that coal-to-coke conversion fell within that meaning. Delegated legislation could not amend or override the statute, nor could it retrospectively take away vested or accrued rights without clear legislative authority. The amended rule was therefore ultra vires the Act and beyond the State&#039;s rule-making power, while the factual issue concerning the date of establishment and commencement of production was left for departmental determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267453</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>