https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332900 Retrospective apportionment of input tax rebate under the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act was unsustainable because an explanation cannot enlarge the substantive rebate provision or withdraw an existing statutory benefit without corresponding amendment of the charging or rebate provisions. Manufacturers using taxable raw materials to produce Schedule II goods remained entitled to full rebate despite generation of a tax-free Schedule I by-product. The apportionment mechanism introduced by the 2014 amendment could operate only prospectively, preserving full input tax rebate for the earlier period. en-us Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332900 Retrospective apportionment of input tax rebate under the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act was unsustainable because an explanation cannot enlarge the substantive rebate provision or withdraw an existing statutory benefit without corresponding amendment of the charging or rebate provisions. Manufacturers using taxable raw materials to produce Schedule II goods remained entitled to full rebate despite generation of a tax-free Schedule I by-product. The apportionment mechanism introduced by the 2014 amendment could operate only prospectively, preserving full input tax rebate for the earlier period. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332900