<?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 (6) TMI 11 - ASSAM HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127981</link>
    <description>For sales-tax purposes, the situs of tea-chest sales depended on the composite character of the transaction, not merely on where title passed or delivery to a carrier occurred. Because the contracts, payment, and delivery arrangements showed elements spread across States and the goods were for despatch and consumption outside Assam, the transactions were not intra-State sales taxable in Assam. A deduction from gross turnover for sales to registered dealers could be claimed only on proof of the statutory ingredients, including a proper declaration as a permissible mode of proof; the authorities were entitled to insist on that proof, and the deduction was not established on the record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:07:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164853" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (6) TMI 11 - ASSAM HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127981</link>
      <description>For sales-tax purposes, the situs of tea-chest sales depended on the composite character of the transaction, not merely on where title passed or delivery to a carrier occurred. Because the contracts, payment, and delivery arrangements showed elements spread across States and the goods were for despatch and consumption outside Assam, the transactions were not intra-State sales taxable in Assam. A deduction from gross turnover for sales to registered dealers could be claimed only on proof of the statutory ingredients, including a proper declaration as a permissible mode of proof; the authorities were entitled to insist on that proof, and the deduction was not established on the record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>