https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338342 A tourism incentive classification limiting exemption to 'A' class units was analysed under Article 14 and held to rest on a valid policy basis. The court noted that the classification was linked to location, investment and other tourism-development factors, and that the petitioner did not show comparable material establishing parity between 'A' and 'B' class units. Because the distinction was neither arbitrary nor illusory, the legitimate expectation and equality challenge failed. The exemption scheme was therefore not extended to the petitioner, and no relief was granted on the ground of discrimination. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 06:40:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338342 A tourism incentive classification limiting exemption to 'A' class units was analysed under Article 14 and held to rest on a valid policy basis. The court noted that the classification was linked to location, investment and other tourism-development factors, and that the petitioner did not show comparable material establishing parity between 'A' and 'B' class units. Because the distinction was neither arbitrary nor illusory, the legitimate expectation and equality challenge failed. The exemption scheme was therefore not extended to the petitioner, and no relief was granted on the ground of discrimination. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338342