<?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 (8) TMI 941 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365469</link>
    <description>A retrospective amendment to the Maharashtra VAT incentive provisions was treated as valid and enforceable because the tax concession remained subject to legislative control, and promissory estoppel could not prevent the Legislature from restructuring the benefit by statute. The amended formula required incentives to be limited proportionately, and excess benefit could be recovered under the validating provision. The revisional authority&#039;s recomputation of deferred sales tax benefits was also sustained because it could intervene where earlier assessments were erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, especially where the factual basis for full deferral was unsupported and the amended statutory method governed the computation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 941 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365469</link>
      <description>A retrospective amendment to the Maharashtra VAT incentive provisions was treated as valid and enforceable because the tax concession remained subject to legislative control, and promissory estoppel could not prevent the Legislature from restructuring the benefit by statute. The amended formula required incentives to be limited proportionately, and excess benefit could be recovered under the validating provision. The revisional authority&#039;s recomputation of deferred sales tax benefits was also sustained because it could intervene where earlier assessments were erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, especially where the factual basis for full deferral was unsupported and the amended statutory method governed the computation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>