<?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 (11) TMI 335 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103873</link>
    <description>A refundable deposit arrangement for tins was treated according to its substance, not the assessee&#039;s accounting entries. Because customers had only a right to return the tins within a stipulated period and no enforceable obligation existed to return them, the arrangement was not a pure bailment. It operated as a composite transaction akin to sale on approval or sale or return, so property in the tins passed on non-return. The amount appropriated from the deposit account for unreturned tins therefore represented sale price and formed part of taxable turnover; the High Court&#039;s view was reversed in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (11) TMI 335 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103873</link>
      <description>A refundable deposit arrangement for tins was treated according to its substance, not the assessee&#039;s accounting entries. Because customers had only a right to return the tins within a stipulated period and no enforceable obligation existed to return them, the arrangement was not a pure bailment. It operated as a composite transaction akin to sale on approval or sale or return, so property in the tins passed on non-return. The amount appropriated from the deposit account for unreturned tins therefore represented sale price and formed part of taxable turnover; the High Court&#039;s view was reversed in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>