<?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>2018 (1) TMI 1253 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354517</link>
    <description>Under an exemption notification issued for industrial development, possession of land for establishing the new unit was treated as a mandatory substantive condition because the unit could not come into existence without land and that requirement directly served the statutory object. By contrast, the stipulation that the land had to be allotted by a particular authority was held to be only a directory condition relating to the mode of acquisition, since that source-based requirement had no real nexus with the purpose of exemption. Non-compliance with the allotment condition therefore did not defeat the exemption claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2018 13:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1253 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354517</link>
      <description>Under an exemption notification issued for industrial development, possession of land for establishing the new unit was treated as a mandatory substantive condition because the unit could not come into existence without land and that requirement directly served the statutory object. By contrast, the stipulation that the land had to be allotted by a particular authority was held to be only a directory condition relating to the mode of acquisition, since that source-based requirement had no real nexus with the purpose of exemption. Non-compliance with the allotment condition therefore did not defeat the exemption claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354517</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>