<?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>2009 (11) TMI 291 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76672</link>
    <description>Second sale exemption under the KGST Act applies only when the later sale is of the same goods purchased within the State. Paper converted into notebooks through cutting, stitching, binding and covering becomes a distinct commercial commodity, so notebooks are not the same goods as paper and the exemption was unavailable on their sale. A Commissioner&#039;s clarification cannot override the statutory entry or its Explanation; to the extent it conflicted with the Act, it had no legal effect. The revisions therefore failed because the notebooks were treated as a separate taxable product and the contrary administrative clarification could not prevail over the statute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 291 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76672</link>
      <description>Second sale exemption under the KGST Act applies only when the later sale is of the same goods purchased within the State. Paper converted into notebooks through cutting, stitching, binding and covering becomes a distinct commercial commodity, so notebooks are not the same goods as paper and the exemption was unavailable on their sale. A Commissioner&#039;s clarification cannot override the statutory entry or its Explanation; to the extent it conflicted with the Act, it had no legal effect. The revisions therefore failed because the notebooks were treated as a separate taxable product and the contrary administrative clarification could not prevail over the statute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76672</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>