https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403623 Revision could be invoked only if the subordinate order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The appellate authority had examined the SEZ unit's refund claim under Section 20(2) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, Rule 130(A) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, and the definition of input in Section 2(19), and treated inputs used for setting up, operation, maintenance, and other covered business purposes as eligible for refund. The revisional authority adopted a narrower view limiting refund to inputs directly connected with manufacture and processing, which was not the statutory position. On that basis, the jurisdictional conditions for revision were absent and the refund on the disputed purchases was sustained. en-us Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Feb 2021 08:25:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403623 Revision could be invoked only if the subordinate order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The appellate authority had examined the SEZ unit's refund claim under Section 20(2) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, Rule 130(A) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, and the definition of input in Section 2(19), and treated inputs used for setting up, operation, maintenance, and other covered business purposes as eligible for refund. The revisional authority adopted a narrower view limiting refund to inputs directly connected with manufacture and processing, which was not the statutory position. On that basis, the jurisdictional conditions for revision were absent and the refund on the disputed purchases was sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403623