https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348353 The article notes that, under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the proviso to Section 19(2) was previously interpreted as confining the 3% limitation to transactions falling within clause (v). It further states that the mere filing or pendency of appeals does not stay the binding effect of that interpretation. As the State's appeals were only at the re-presentation stage and no stay had been granted, the authorities were required to examine the petitioner's refund representation on merits and in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Sep 2017 07:05:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348353 The article notes that, under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the proviso to Section 19(2) was previously interpreted as confining the 3% limitation to transactions falling within clause (v). It further states that the mere filing or pendency of appeals does not stay the binding effect of that interpretation. As the State's appeals were only at the re-presentation stage and no stay had been granted, the authorities were required to examine the petitioner's refund representation on merits and in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348353