<?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>1955 (1) TMI 28 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127417</link>
    <description>A provincial sales tax provision was upheld because a tax on sales is valid where the transaction has a real and sufficient territorial nexus with the Province; the presence or production of goods within the State supplied that connection, so the amended definition of sale was intra vires. The challenge based on repugnancy also failed because the sales tax law derived its power from a Provincial List entry, while the Sale of Goods Act operated in a different legislative field; section 107(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was therefore not attracted, and the absence of Governor-General&#039;s assent did not invalidate the provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 16:27:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164294" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1955 (1) TMI 28 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127417</link>
      <description>A provincial sales tax provision was upheld because a tax on sales is valid where the transaction has a real and sufficient territorial nexus with the Province; the presence or production of goods within the State supplied that connection, so the amended definition of sale was intra vires. The challenge based on repugnancy also failed because the sales tax law derived its power from a Provincial List entry, while the Sale of Goods Act operated in a different legislative field; section 107(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was therefore not attracted, and the absence of Governor-General&#039;s assent did not invalidate the provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>