https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98948 Article 286(3) was read as disabling only a State law made after a Parliamentary declaration of essential goods from taxing sales of those goods; a pre-existing State sales tax law was therefore not invalidated. Explanation (2) to section 2(k) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act was construed as operating only where Article 286 itself barred taxation, so it did not exclude sales of coarse and medium cloth from the statutory definition of sale. The constitutional and statutory objections to levy were accordingly rejected, and the sales tax assessments were upheld. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2014 19:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98948 Article 286(3) was read as disabling only a State law made after a Parliamentary declaration of essential goods from taxing sales of those goods; a pre-existing State sales tax law was therefore not invalidated. Explanation (2) to section 2(k) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act was construed as operating only where Article 286 itself barred taxation, so it did not exclude sales of coarse and medium cloth from the statutory definition of sale. The constitutional and statutory objections to levy were accordingly rejected, and the sales tax assessments were upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 03 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98948