https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333354 Input tax credit was admissible on machinery parts used in the manufacturing process under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, because the goods were not goods for construction of building or infrastructure and did not fall within the specific nil-credit exclusions in Schedule E. The definitions of capital goods, input tax and tax invoice, read with Section 8 and Schedule E, showed that credit is denied only where the goods squarely match the disqualifying categories. The first proviso to Section 8(1) also preserved pro rata credit where only partial disqualifying use is shown, subject to statutory conditions. en-us Wed, 05 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2018 12:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333354 Input tax credit was admissible on machinery parts used in the manufacturing process under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, because the goods were not goods for construction of building or infrastructure and did not fall within the specific nil-credit exclusions in Schedule E. The definitions of capital goods, input tax and tax invoice, read with Section 8 and Schedule E, showed that credit is denied only where the goods squarely match the disqualifying categories. The first proviso to Section 8(1) also preserved pro rata credit where only partial disqualifying use is shown, subject to statutory conditions. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 05 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333354