<?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>2008 (4) TMI 801 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738</link>
    <description>The court directed the State Government to consider the petitioner&#039;s application for sales-tax deferment benefits under the scheme, excluding the period from 13.07.2000 to 27.02.2004. The petitioner was prohibited from claiming sales-tax deferment benefits beyond 14.08.2020 and seeking a refund of the sales tax already paid. Furthermore, the sales-tax deferment amount was reduced by Rs. 700 crores. These directions were issued due to the peculiar circumstances where the High Court&#039;s decision adversely affected the petitioner without proper hearing, subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2019 16:47:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 801 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738</link>
      <description>The court directed the State Government to consider the petitioner&#039;s application for sales-tax deferment benefits under the scheme, excluding the period from 13.07.2000 to 27.02.2004. The petitioner was prohibited from claiming sales-tax deferment benefits beyond 14.08.2020 and seeking a refund of the sales tax already paid. Furthermore, the sales-tax deferment amount was reduced by Rs. 700 crores. These directions were issued due to the peculiar circumstances where the High Court&#039;s decision adversely affected the petitioner without proper hearing, subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>