https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327931 The Madras HC upheld the phrase "in the State" in the Tamil Nadu VAT Act definition of "capital goods", holding that the provision creates a valid statutory classification for concessional treatment and does not offend Articles 14, 286(1)(a) or 303, nor conflict with the Central Sales Tax Act. It rejected the contention that the words could be ignored as redundant or treated as a charging provision. On individual claims, the Court held that goods must satisfy the statutory definition and use-based conditions, and that the absence of declaration forms for sales to other-State Government entities did not justify reading down the provision or granting substantive writ relief, though statutory appeals and interim protection were preserved. en-us Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 22 May 2016 19:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327931 The Madras HC upheld the phrase "in the State" in the Tamil Nadu VAT Act definition of "capital goods", holding that the provision creates a valid statutory classification for concessional treatment and does not offend Articles 14, 286(1)(a) or 303, nor conflict with the Central Sales Tax Act. It rejected the contention that the words could be ignored as redundant or treated as a charging provision. On individual claims, the Court held that goods must satisfy the statutory definition and use-based conditions, and that the absence of declaration forms for sales to other-State Government entities did not justify reading down the provision or granting substantive writ relief, though statutory appeals and interim protection were preserved. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327931