<?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>1953 (8) TMI 16 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127240</link>
    <description>Collection of dharmam and dhallal by a commission agent, with the disclosed principals&#039; knowledge and in conformity with established trade usage at Tellicherry, did not violate the licence conditions under Section 8 of the General Sales Tax Act. The accepted evidence showed that such collections were commonly made from buyers, often in the principals&#039; presence, and the fact that the amounts were not part of the principals&#039; disclosed proceeds did not by itself create a breach. The collection therefore remained within the exemption contemplated by Section 8, and the assessee was entitled to continue claiming that benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:41:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (8) TMI 16 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127240</link>
      <description>Collection of dharmam and dhallal by a commission agent, with the disclosed principals&#039; knowledge and in conformity with established trade usage at Tellicherry, did not violate the licence conditions under Section 8 of the General Sales Tax Act. The accepted evidence showed that such collections were commonly made from buyers, often in the principals&#039; presence, and the fact that the amounts were not part of the principals&#039; disclosed proceeds did not by itself create a breach. The collection therefore remained within the exemption contemplated by Section 8, and the assessee was entitled to continue claiming that benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>