<?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>1994 (7) TMI 292 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103762</link>
    <description>A dealer breaches a resale declaration when goods are obtained on the footing of intra-State resale but are in fact purchased to fulfil pre-existing export contracts; the proviso to the relevant Orissa sales tax provision is therefore attracted. A sale remains in the course of export where it forms part of an integrated export transaction beginning with the foreign buyer&#039;s contract and ending with export delivery, and it is not split into a local sale merely because delivery occurs at an inland port; that sale is outside State taxing power. The export-sale protection was upheld, while the misdeclaration issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 292 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103762</link>
      <description>A dealer breaches a resale declaration when goods are obtained on the footing of intra-State resale but are in fact purchased to fulfil pre-existing export contracts; the proviso to the relevant Orissa sales tax provision is therefore attracted. A sale remains in the course of export where it forms part of an integrated export transaction beginning with the foreign buyer&#039;s contract and ending with export delivery, and it is not split into a local sale merely because delivery occurs at an inland port; that sale is outside State taxing power. The export-sale protection was upheld, while the misdeclaration issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103762</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>