<?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>2006 (8) TMI 304 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105775</link>
    <description>Coal dust converted into coal briquettes by crushing, mixing with binders and pressing was held to amount to manufacture under the U.P. Trade Tax Act because the statutory definition of manufacture includes processing, treating or adapting goods. The briquettes were treated as a different commercial commodity from coal dust, with changed shape, form, moisture and characteristics, and that factual finding was not open to interference. The claim to protection as declared goods under the Central Sales Tax Act failed because the sold commodity was not regarded as the same goods for exemption or single-stage taxation. The tax demand was therefore sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 May 2014 12:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142812" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 304 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105775</link>
      <description>Coal dust converted into coal briquettes by crushing, mixing with binders and pressing was held to amount to manufacture under the U.P. Trade Tax Act because the statutory definition of manufacture includes processing, treating or adapting goods. The briquettes were treated as a different commercial commodity from coal dust, with changed shape, form, moisture and characteristics, and that factual finding was not open to interference. The claim to protection as declared goods under the Central Sales Tax Act failed because the sold commodity was not regarded as the same goods for exemption or single-stage taxation. The tax demand was therefore sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>