<?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>1961 (4) TMI 74 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99411</link>
    <description>A lump-sum agreement for construction and installation of a coke oven battery was analysed as a whole and treated as an entire, indivisible works contract rather than a separate sale of materials. The clause providing that materials brought on site would become the owner&#039;s property was regarded as ancillary to performance and protection of the works, not proof of a distinct sales bargain. On that basis, sales tax could not be levied on the value of materials used in execution of the contract, and writ relief was available to quash proceedings founded on an incompetent levy. One opinion dissented on the scope of factual inquiry in writ jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 16:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (4) TMI 74 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99411</link>
      <description>A lump-sum agreement for construction and installation of a coke oven battery was analysed as a whole and treated as an entire, indivisible works contract rather than a separate sale of materials. The clause providing that materials brought on site would become the owner&#039;s property was regarded as ancillary to performance and protection of the works, not proof of a distinct sales bargain. On that basis, sales tax could not be levied on the value of materials used in execution of the contract, and writ relief was available to quash proceedings founded on an incompetent levy. One opinion dissented on the scope of factual inquiry in writ jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>