Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2007 (2) TMI 616

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IRAJA PANDIAN J.-The petitioner is a sugar mill. It has availed deferral as per G.O. Ms. No. 989 (Industries) dated September 1, 1998 for a period of four years from March 1, 1989 to March 31, 2003. The capacity of the mill is 2500 tonnes of cane crushing per day. As per the G.O., newly established sugar mills are eligible for deferral of tax on last purchase of sugarcane payable for a period of f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or before March 25, 2003 and Rs. 0.50 crores on or before March 31, 2003. The purchase tax from April, 2003 to January, 2004 was not paid by the petitioner and that amount which was not covered by the order of stay is demanded by the notice which is challenged in Writ Petition No. 25944 of 2005. The petitioner sent a reply dated February 26, 2003 in which it is stated that as per the G.O. Ms. N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... have gone through the impugned order. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of G.O. Ms. No. 989 dated September 1, 1988 and G.O. Ms. No. 43 dated December 13, 1992 and if the benefits of the G.Os. are given to the petitioner, there would be no liability on the part of the petitioner to pay any amount, as demanded by the respondent. The claim of the petiti....