<?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 (7) TMI 3 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127243</link>
    <description>Article 286(1)(a) barred Orissa from levying sales tax on sales where goods were booked in the State but delivered outside the State for consumption. The inter-State character of the transaction meant that the place where property passed was immaterial; what controlled was that the cocoanuts were delivered outside Orissa and not for consumption within the State. On those admitted facts, Orissa lacked taxing jurisdiction over the sales, and the constitutional challenge succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 10:14:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (7) TMI 3 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127243</link>
      <description>Article 286(1)(a) barred Orissa from levying sales tax on sales where goods were booked in the State but delivered outside the State for consumption. The inter-State character of the transaction meant that the place where property passed was immaterial; what controlled was that the cocoanuts were delivered outside Orissa and not for consumption within the State. On those admitted facts, Orissa lacked taxing jurisdiction over the sales, and the constitutional challenge succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>