https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341395 Rule 20 of the Punjab VAT Rules was upheld as a valid regulatory measure under Section 13(3), because the 90-day time limit for return of job-work goods was intended to support verification and prevent misuse, not to override the statutory scheme. The 90-day period was treated as directory rather than mandatory, since restoration of input tax credit depends on proof that the same goods were returned after processing. Credit cannot be denied merely because the goods came back after 90 days if the delay is reasonable and does not prejudice the department's ability to verify identity. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341395 Rule 20 of the Punjab VAT Rules was upheld as a valid regulatory measure under Section 13(3), because the 90-day time limit for return of job-work goods was intended to support verification and prevent misuse, not to override the statutory scheme. The 90-day period was treated as directory rather than mandatory, since restoration of input tax credit depends on proof that the same goods were returned after processing. Credit cannot be denied merely because the goods came back after 90 days if the delay is reasonable and does not prejudice the department's ability to verify identity. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341395