<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (12) TMI 1013 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352744</link>
    <description>An exemption for hank yarn under the Tamil Nadu VAT schedule was construed narrowly: the court held that 100% viscose staple fibre hank yarn did not fall within the exemption meant for hank yarn used by the handloom sector and was taxable under the general entry. Applying strict construction of exemption provisions, it accepted the legislative purpose and commercial context as supporting a limited meaning of hank yarn. The court also held that the clarification authority was competent to determine the correct rate of tax and exemption entry, and that neither an earlier tribunal ruling nor a plea for prospective operation barred the clarification. The writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2018 14:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=500676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1013 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352744</link>
      <description>An exemption for hank yarn under the Tamil Nadu VAT schedule was construed narrowly: the court held that 100% viscose staple fibre hank yarn did not fall within the exemption meant for hank yarn used by the handloom sector and was taxable under the general entry. Applying strict construction of exemption provisions, it accepted the legislative purpose and commercial context as supporting a limited meaning of hank yarn. The court also held that the clarification authority was competent to determine the correct rate of tax and exemption entry, and that neither an earlier tribunal ruling nor a plea for prospective operation barred the clarification. The writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352744</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>