https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393555 Entry tax legislation intended to maintain parity between imported goods and similar locally sold goods must be applied consistently with Article 304(a). When VAT on the same goods was reduced to 1%, continuation of entry tax at 4% without a valid, non-discriminatory justification was treated as hostile discrimination. The Court noted that section 3(1A) permitted additional goods only to remove inequity or discrimination, and that the State had shown no special circumstances to preserve the higher rate. Input tax credit or refund could not cure an otherwise discriminatory levy. The impugned entry tax demand was therefore held invalid and the notices were quashed. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Dec 2020 10:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393555 Entry tax legislation intended to maintain parity between imported goods and similar locally sold goods must be applied consistently with Article 304(a). When VAT on the same goods was reduced to 1%, continuation of entry tax at 4% without a valid, non-discriminatory justification was treated as hostile discrimination. The Court noted that section 3(1A) permitted additional goods only to remove inequity or discrimination, and that the State had shown no special circumstances to preserve the higher rate. Input tax credit or refund could not cure an otherwise discriminatory levy. The impugned entry tax demand was therefore held invalid and the notices were quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393555