<?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>1960 (10) TMI 57 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99239</link>
    <description>Sales of bunker coal supplied to steamers were not sales in the course of export, because export protection applies only where the goods are part of an export movement with two termini directed to a foreign destination. The transactions did have an inter-State element, but the levy was not avoided on that ground because the constitutional objection was displaced by later validation. The sales nonetheless fell within the Explanation to Article 286(1)(a), as delivery was made to the actual consumer in the State for use by that consumer. A valid exemption notification under the Travancore-Cochin Sales Tax Act applied, so the tax demand could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2014 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136294" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (10) TMI 57 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99239</link>
      <description>Sales of bunker coal supplied to steamers were not sales in the course of export, because export protection applies only where the goods are part of an export movement with two termini directed to a foreign destination. The transactions did have an inter-State element, but the levy was not avoided on that ground because the constitutional objection was displaced by later validation. The sales nonetheless fell within the Explanation to Article 286(1)(a), as delivery was made to the actual consumer in the State for use by that consumer. A valid exemption notification under the Travancore-Cochin Sales Tax Act applied, so the tax demand could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>