<?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>1988 (5) TMI 351 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102831</link>
    <description>A second assessment on the same turnover under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957 was not justified where that turnover had already been assessed and tax had been collected from the depots as dealers. The legal effect was that section 12-A could not be used to levy a further tax on turnover already subjected to assessment and realisation. On those facts, the duplicate assessment was impermissible because the same taxable turnover had already been brought to tax once.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 13:06:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139877" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (5) TMI 351 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102831</link>
      <description>A second assessment on the same turnover under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957 was not justified where that turnover had already been assessed and tax had been collected from the depots as dealers. The legal effect was that section 12-A could not be used to levy a further tax on turnover already subjected to assessment and realisation. On those facts, the duplicate assessment was impermissible because the same taxable turnover had already been brought to tax once.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>