<?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>1959 (2) TMI 24 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127844</link>
    <description>The U.P. sales tax provision was treated as valid because a State may tax sales where there is sufficient nexus between the transaction and the taxing State, even if the sale is completed outside the State. Applying that principle, manufacture of oils and soaps in Uttar Pradesh supplied the necessary territorial connection, so clause (ii) of Explanation II to section 2(h) was upheld as intra vires. On the same reasoning, sales made from a depot at Calcutta were held taxable in Uttar Pradesh because the goods had been manufactured within the State. The assessee&#039;s challenge failed and the tax liability on the disputed sales was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:32:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164719" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (2) TMI 24 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127844</link>
      <description>The U.P. sales tax provision was treated as valid because a State may tax sales where there is sufficient nexus between the transaction and the taxing State, even if the sale is completed outside the State. Applying that principle, manufacture of oils and soaps in Uttar Pradesh supplied the necessary territorial connection, so clause (ii) of Explanation II to section 2(h) was upheld as intra vires. On the same reasoning, sales made from a depot at Calcutta were held taxable in Uttar Pradesh because the goods had been manufactured within the State. The assessee&#039;s challenge failed and the tax liability on the disputed sales was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>