<?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 (9) TMI 724 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366988</link>
    <description>Goods integral to the kraft paper manufacturing chain, including a renewable energy device, boilers, boiler components and materials for erection, were treated as capital goods because Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act covers plant, machinery, equipment and their components, accessories and spare parts used in manufacture or processing. On that basis, input tax credit under Section 19(3) was held available. The availability of an appellate remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where a Commissioner&#039;s clarification on the same issue would make an appeal to the same authority an empty formality, so the writ petitions were maintainable and the rejection of credit was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 11:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 724 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366988</link>
      <description>Goods integral to the kraft paper manufacturing chain, including a renewable energy device, boilers, boiler components and materials for erection, were treated as capital goods because Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act covers plant, machinery, equipment and their components, accessories and spare parts used in manufacture or processing. On that basis, input tax credit under Section 19(3) was held available. The availability of an appellate remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where a Commissioner&#039;s clarification on the same issue would make an appeal to the same authority an empty formality, so the writ petitions were maintainable and the rejection of credit was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>