<?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 (8) TMI 44 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127868</link>
    <description>Groundnut in the sales tax rules was construed broadly to include groundnut kernel because the scheme of the Rules showed kernel was within legislative contemplation; mere shelling did not exclude it, so the kernel was taxable at the purchase point. Charity was treated as outside turnover, but cooly collected by the dealer was included because the exemption for packing, delivery and similar expenses covered only costs connected with delivery of the sold article, not transport charges incurred before the goods reached the dealer&#039;s business premises. The assessment was therefore sustained on both substantive issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:31:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (8) TMI 44 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127868</link>
      <description>Groundnut in the sales tax rules was construed broadly to include groundnut kernel because the scheme of the Rules showed kernel was within legislative contemplation; mere shelling did not exclude it, so the kernel was taxable at the purchase point. Charity was treated as outside turnover, but cooly collected by the dealer was included because the exemption for packing, delivery and similar expenses covered only costs connected with delivery of the sold article, not transport charges incurred before the goods reached the dealer&#039;s business premises. The assessment was therefore sustained on both substantive issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>