<?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 (10) TMI 887 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368921</link>
    <description>Input tax credit under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime was treated as a statutory concession that the Legislature could condition and exclude on a rational basis. The restriction denying credit where inter-State sales fell under Section 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act and Form C was unavailable was upheld as generally valid because the classification between registered and unregistered dealer transactions was linked to preventing tax evasion and protecting revenue. However, for exclusive sales to other State Governments, the anti-evasion rationale did not apply; the provision was therefore read down so that such purchasers were treated as registered dealers for this limited purpose, subject to a certificate from the purchasing State Government.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 15:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 887 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368921</link>
      <description>Input tax credit under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime was treated as a statutory concession that the Legislature could condition and exclude on a rational basis. The restriction denying credit where inter-State sales fell under Section 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act and Form C was unavailable was upheld as generally valid because the classification between registered and unregistered dealer transactions was linked to preventing tax evasion and protecting revenue. However, for exclusive sales to other State Governments, the anti-evasion rationale did not apply; the provision was therefore read down so that such purchasers were treated as registered dealers for this limited purpose, subject to a certificate from the purchasing State Government.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>