https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347304 A successor manufacturer brought within the exemption framework by Section 4-A(2-B) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act can also claim deferred-tax treatment under Section 8(2-A) read with Rule 43, because the provisions must be read harmoniously and the eligibility certificate remains referable to Section 4-A. The High Court held that moratorium could not be denied by restricting the discontinuance-of-business language to the original manufacturer where the statutory scheme extends exemption benefits to the successor for the unexpired period. The rejection of the deferment claim and the consequential demand were set aside, and the authority was directed to reconsider the application by a reasoned order. en-us Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Sep 2017 11:15:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347304 A successor manufacturer brought within the exemption framework by Section 4-A(2-B) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act can also claim deferred-tax treatment under Section 8(2-A) read with Rule 43, because the provisions must be read harmoniously and the eligibility certificate remains referable to Section 4-A. The High Court held that moratorium could not be denied by restricting the discontinuance-of-business language to the original manufacturer where the statutory scheme extends exemption benefits to the successor for the unexpired period. The rejection of the deferment claim and the consequential demand were set aside, and the authority was directed to reconsider the application by a reasoned order. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347304