<?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>2022 (5) TMI 308 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422048</link>
    <description>An industrial policy granting electricity-duty exemption for captive power generation for ten years from commercial production was held to apply on its own terms, without importing a separate &quot;only once&quot; restriction from another incentive scheme. The policy distinction between electricity-duty exemption and captive power generating subsidy was treated as material, and the captive power plant was not confined to a single-unit limitation absent clear language. The later extension of the follow-up notification and the certificate of commercial production supported entitlement, while objections based on concealment and expansion were rejected. The revisional orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment giving effect to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 May 2022 06:36:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 308 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422048</link>
      <description>An industrial policy granting electricity-duty exemption for captive power generation for ten years from commercial production was held to apply on its own terms, without importing a separate &quot;only once&quot; restriction from another incentive scheme. The policy distinction between electricity-duty exemption and captive power generating subsidy was treated as material, and the captive power plant was not confined to a single-unit limitation absent clear language. The later extension of the follow-up notification and the certificate of commercial production supported entitlement, while objections based on concealment and expansion were rejected. The revisional orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment giving effect to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>