<?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>1956 (4) TMI 42 - HYDERABAD, HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127512</link>
    <description>Under the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950, purchase turnover of groundnut and cotton seeds used in manufacturing oil was treated as taxable at the purchase point, because the statutory scheme defined turnover broadly and rule 5(2) expressly provided for assessment of groundnut at that stage. Section 5(1) was read as supporting, not restricting, the charging scheme in section 4, and the phrase &quot;series of sales&quot; was not confined to cases involving multiple sales in every instance. The commentary also notes that a penalty objection not raised before the appellate authority was not entertained where the assessee had failed to file returns and produce books despite notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:07:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164389" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (4) TMI 42 - HYDERABAD, HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127512</link>
      <description>Under the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950, purchase turnover of groundnut and cotton seeds used in manufacturing oil was treated as taxable at the purchase point, because the statutory scheme defined turnover broadly and rule 5(2) expressly provided for assessment of groundnut at that stage. Section 5(1) was read as supporting, not restricting, the charging scheme in section 4, and the phrase &quot;series of sales&quot; was not confined to cases involving multiple sales in every instance. The commentary also notes that a penalty objection not raised before the appellate authority was not entertained where the assessee had failed to file returns and produce books despite notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>