https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328208 Purchase tax on sugarcane under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was treated as lawfully leviable, and input tax credit was denied on that tax because the issue had already been decided against the assessee in a binding earlier HC ruling. The Court saw no reason to depart from settled precedent and applied that view to the present dispute. The argument based on Article 266 of the Constitution did not change the result, as the manner of collection and utilisation of the tax could not override the earlier binding decision. The issue was decided in favour of the Revenue. en-us Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328208 Purchase tax on sugarcane under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was treated as lawfully leviable, and input tax credit was denied on that tax because the issue had already been decided against the assessee in a binding earlier HC ruling. The Court saw no reason to depart from settled precedent and applied that view to the present dispute. The argument based on Article 266 of the Constitution did not change the result, as the manner of collection and utilisation of the tax could not override the earlier binding decision. The issue was decided in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328208