https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738 A court-restraint period later followed by the grant of wildlife permission was held excludable when computing whether commercial production began within the incentive-scheme deadline, because the project had been blocked for reasons beyond the petitioner's control and no party should suffer by an act of the court. The delayed commencement was therefore not treated as disqualifying. The petitioner was also held eligible to be considered for sales-tax and value added tax deferment benefits, subject to agreed restrictions, including no refund of tax already paid and no benefit beyond the stipulated cut-off date. Restitution and equitable relief were applied to preserve scheme benefits despite the obstructed timeline. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Apr 2019 16:47:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738 A court-restraint period later followed by the grant of wildlife permission was held excludable when computing whether commercial production began within the incentive-scheme deadline, because the project had been blocked for reasons beyond the petitioner's control and no party should suffer by an act of the court. The delayed commencement was therefore not treated as disqualifying. The petitioner was also held eligible to be considered for sales-tax and value added tax deferment benefits, subject to agreed restrictions, including no refund of tax already paid and no benefit beyond the stipulated cut-off date. Restitution and equitable relief were applied to preserve scheme benefits despite the obstructed timeline. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279738