https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329194 The 2005 sales tax incentive scheme required a distinction between the earlier exemption model, which barred tax collection, and the later Karnataka VAT/CST procedure, which expressly required the unit to collect tax, pay the net tax, and obtain refund. The commentary explains that the earlier disqualifying condition could not be mechanically carried forward into the post-2005 notification, particularly where the Department had already accepted returns and granted refund under the same later procedure for an earlier period. It also notes that exemption notifications for new industries are to be construed liberally once eligibility is established, so the refund mechanism under the operative notification should prevail. en-us Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329194 The 2005 sales tax incentive scheme required a distinction between the earlier exemption model, which barred tax collection, and the later Karnataka VAT/CST procedure, which expressly required the unit to collect tax, pay the net tax, and obtain refund. The commentary explains that the earlier disqualifying condition could not be mechanically carried forward into the post-2005 notification, particularly where the Department had already accepted returns and granted refund under the same later procedure for an earlier period. It also notes that exemption notifications for new industries are to be construed liberally once eligibility is established, so the refund mechanism under the operative notification should prevail. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329194