<?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>1957 (3) TMI 52 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127654</link>
    <description>A pre-Constitution sales tax law continued under Article 372 remained valid against a constitutional competence challenge because the tax on works contracts had been lawfully leviable before the Constitution and was protected by Article 277; the levy on works-contract turnover was therefore upheld. The assessment was also not invalid because the rules contemplated deduction for labour and materials, and although the Board of Revenue had not fixed a further percentage, the assessee had already received the maximum permissible deduction of 30 per cent without demonstrated prejudice. The assessment under the works-contract turnover was thus sustained and no interference was called for under Article 226.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:32:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (3) TMI 52 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127654</link>
      <description>A pre-Constitution sales tax law continued under Article 372 remained valid against a constitutional competence challenge because the tax on works contracts had been lawfully leviable before the Constitution and was protected by Article 277; the levy on works-contract turnover was therefore upheld. The assessment was also not invalid because the rules contemplated deduction for labour and materials, and although the Board of Revenue had not fixed a further percentage, the assessee had already received the maximum permissible deduction of 30 per cent without demonstrated prejudice. The assessment under the works-contract turnover was thus sustained and no interference was called for under Article 226.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>