<?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 (2) TMI 1258 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183526</link>
    <description>Exemption notifications must be construed strictly on their plain language, so a turnover tax exemption for chemical fertilizers could not be extended by interpretation to chemical fertilizer mixtures. The scheme of entry 11 in the Second Schedule treated fertilizers and fertilizer mixtures as distinct commercial commodities, and the earlier binding decision had already read the same notification as excluding mixtures. A co-ordinate forum cannot disregard that precedent on the ground of per incuriam; the proper course is reference to a larger Bench. The Tribunal therefore erred in declining to follow the binding decision and in setting aside the reassessment orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:08:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 1258 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183526</link>
      <description>Exemption notifications must be construed strictly on their plain language, so a turnover tax exemption for chemical fertilizers could not be extended by interpretation to chemical fertilizer mixtures. The scheme of entry 11 in the Second Schedule treated fertilizers and fertilizer mixtures as distinct commercial commodities, and the earlier binding decision had already read the same notification as excluding mixtures. A co-ordinate forum cannot disregard that precedent on the ground of per incuriam; the proper course is reference to a larger Bench. The Tribunal therefore erred in declining to follow the binding decision and in setting aside the reassessment orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>