https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332204 An industrial incentive scheme under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act was construed as requiring eligibility to be determined first, with the later quantification of benefit dealt with separately. The High Court noted that Rule 28A and its negative list did not expressly exclude cattle feed or units manufacturing tax-free products, so a unit could not be denied an eligibility certificate merely because its finished product was not liable to sales tax. The Court also held that an alleged departmental clarification did not bar the challenge where it was not duly communicated. On that basis, the rejection orders were quashed and the authorities were directed to proceed according to law. en-us Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332204 An industrial incentive scheme under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act was construed as requiring eligibility to be determined first, with the later quantification of benefit dealt with separately. The High Court noted that Rule 28A and its negative list did not expressly exclude cattle feed or units manufacturing tax-free products, so a unit could not be denied an eligibility certificate merely because its finished product was not liable to sales tax. The Court also held that an alleged departmental clarification did not bar the challenge where it was not duly communicated. On that basis, the rejection orders were quashed and the authorities were directed to proceed according to law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332204