<?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 (8) TMI 35 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99580</link>
    <description>An exemption notification for hand-made footwear applied only when the goods were sold by the manufacturer or a family member within the State, at the specified low price, and the conditions could not be expanded to cover an importer&#039;s sale of goods purchased outside the State. The Court held that the respondent, as an importer selling in the State, could not claim the exemption. It further held that the notification did not offend Article 304(a) because the exemption operated uniformly on the relevant class of goods and sales, and any burden on out-of-State traders arose from the local sale point rather than unequal treatment. The assessment was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136632" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (8) TMI 35 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99580</link>
      <description>An exemption notification for hand-made footwear applied only when the goods were sold by the manufacturer or a family member within the State, at the specified low price, and the conditions could not be expanded to cover an importer&#039;s sale of goods purchased outside the State. The Court held that the respondent, as an importer selling in the State, could not claim the exemption. It further held that the notification did not offend Article 304(a) because the exemption operated uniformly on the relevant class of goods and sales, and any burden on out-of-State traders arose from the local sale point rather than unequal treatment. The assessment was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>