<?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 (9) TMI 40 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127729</link>
    <description>A members&#039; club supplying goods to its members can be treated as a dealer under sales tax law only if the supplies are carried on as a business. The Bombay HC held that the club reference in the definition of dealer must be read consistently with the business requirement, so liability depends on proof of business activity and not merely club membership. On the record before it, the Court could not determine whether any profit-making motive or business character existed, and the prior registration order had not been challenged through the statutory appellate route. Writ relief was therefore refused and the registration and assessment were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:06:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (9) TMI 40 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127729</link>
      <description>A members&#039; club supplying goods to its members can be treated as a dealer under sales tax law only if the supplies are carried on as a business. The Bombay HC held that the club reference in the definition of dealer must be read consistently with the business requirement, so liability depends on proof of business activity and not merely club membership. On the record before it, the Court could not determine whether any profit-making motive or business character existed, and the prior registration order had not been challenged through the statutory appellate route. Writ relief was therefore refused and the registration and assessment were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>