<?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>1954 (7) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127413</link>
    <description>The Court granted the writ of certiorari, quashing the assessment order that imposed double tax on a portion of the petitioners&#039; turnover. The Court held that there was only one actual sale to retailers, not two separate sales as interpreted by the tax officer. It asserted jurisdiction under Article 226 to protect the petitioners&#039; property rights from an illegal tax imposition, allowing the petition and awarding costs to the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:41:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (7) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127413</link>
      <description>The Court granted the writ of certiorari, quashing the assessment order that imposed double tax on a portion of the petitioners&#039; turnover. The Court held that there was only one actual sale to retailers, not two separate sales as interpreted by the tax officer. It asserted jurisdiction under Article 226 to protect the petitioners&#039; property rights from an illegal tax imposition, allowing the petition and awarding costs to the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127413</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>