https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329690 Penalty under Section 4-B(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was held to follow where goods covered by a recognition certificate were used for a purpose other than that for which the certificate was granted; cancellation of the certificate was not a condition precedent. The entry of "iron and steel" in Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act was construed as exhaustive because the words "that is to say" limit the enumeration to the specified sub-clauses. On that construction, two-way cages were not covered by the entry, and the penalty challenge failed. en-us Mon, 04 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jul 2016 09:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329690 Penalty under Section 4-B(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was held to follow where goods covered by a recognition certificate were used for a purpose other than that for which the certificate was granted; cancellation of the certificate was not a condition precedent. The entry of "iron and steel" in Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act was construed as exhaustive because the words "that is to say" limit the enumeration to the specified sub-clauses. On that construction, two-way cages were not covered by the entry, and the penalty challenge failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 04 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329690