https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183688 Under the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, the existence of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the dispute raised a pure question of statutory interpretation on admitted facts, so the writ petition was maintainable. On the merits, input tax rebate was held admissible for goods purchased from a registered dealer and used to fabricate plant and machinery employed in manufacturing the final product. The court construed the rebate provision broadly, treating inputs used for plant and machinery as covered goods used in or in relation to manufacture, and rejected denial of credit merely because the goods were not themselves part of the finished product. The assessment refusing rebate was therefore unsustainable and required reconsideration. en-us Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jun 2016 08:56:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183688 Under the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, the existence of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the dispute raised a pure question of statutory interpretation on admitted facts, so the writ petition was maintainable. On the merits, input tax rebate was held admissible for goods purchased from a registered dealer and used to fabricate plant and machinery employed in manufacturing the final product. The court construed the rebate provision broadly, treating inputs used for plant and machinery as covered goods used in or in relation to manufacture, and rejected denial of credit merely because the goods were not themselves part of the finished product. The assessment refusing rebate was therefore unsustainable and required reconsideration. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183688