<?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>1962 (4) TMI 53 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99529</link>
    <description>Endorsement of delivery orders in the course of business, followed by delivery of the gunny bags to the ultimate holder, was treated as a sale of goods because the transaction, in substance, transferred property in the goods. Although the goods were unascertained at the initial contract stage, they were in existence and capable of appropriation when the delivery orders were issued. The endorsement was not merely a transfer of paper; it enabled delivery from the mills and completed the chain of sale, with title acquired on delivery relating back through the intermediate transfers. The transactions were therefore chargeable to tax as sales under the Madras General Sales Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (4) TMI 53 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99529</link>
      <description>Endorsement of delivery orders in the course of business, followed by delivery of the gunny bags to the ultimate holder, was treated as a sale of goods because the transaction, in substance, transferred property in the goods. Although the goods were unascertained at the initial contract stage, they were in existence and capable of appropriation when the delivery orders were issued. The endorsement was not merely a transfer of paper; it enabled delivery from the mills and completed the chain of sale, with title acquired on delivery relating back through the intermediate transfers. The transactions were therefore chargeable to tax as sales under the Madras General Sales Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>