https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347145 A prior interpretation of the proviso to Section 19(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 confined the input tax credit restriction to transactions covered by clause (v), not to the other purposes listed in Section 19(2). Mere pendency of an appeal did not suspend that ruling because no interim stay had been shown. The Madras High Court therefore directed fresh consideration of the petitioner's refund representation on merits, taking the earlier decision into account, and required a reasoned order in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:32:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347145 A prior interpretation of the proviso to Section 19(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 confined the input tax credit restriction to transactions covered by clause (v), not to the other purposes listed in Section 19(2). Mere pendency of an appeal did not suspend that ruling because no interim stay had been shown. The Madras High Court therefore directed fresh consideration of the petitioner's refund representation on merits, taking the earlier decision into account, and required a reasoned order in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347145