<?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>1981 (3) TMI 221 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102071</link>
    <description>Section 5(1-A) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 was construed as a single-point levy on the first stage sale of the specified goods, with the proviso operating as an exemption for subsequent sales on production of the prescribed certificates. The phrase &quot;registered dealer from whom the goods were purchased&quot; was read to mean the registered dealer from whom the goods were originally bought at the first taxable stage, not necessarily the immediate seller. On that interpretation, sales by the assessee to consumers were subsequent sales outside the taxable first stage, and the notification dated 30 March 1966 was treated as consistent with that position. The sales tax demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (3) TMI 221 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102071</link>
      <description>Section 5(1-A) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 was construed as a single-point levy on the first stage sale of the specified goods, with the proviso operating as an exemption for subsequent sales on production of the prescribed certificates. The phrase &quot;registered dealer from whom the goods were purchased&quot; was read to mean the registered dealer from whom the goods were originally bought at the first taxable stage, not necessarily the immediate seller. On that interpretation, sales by the assessee to consumers were subsequent sales outside the taxable first stage, and the notification dated 30 March 1966 was treated as consistent with that position. The sales tax demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102071</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>