<?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>1958 (9) TMI 75 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127984</link>
    <description>Railway freight deducted by a dealer was held not to qualify as a cash discount under trade practice for exclusion from sale price under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, because section 2(14) permits only deductions recognised as cash discounts and section 2(20) cannot enlarge that allowance. The later criminal prosecution for the same tax arrears was treated as barred where it concerned part of the same amount already the subject of an earlier acquittal and an understanding between the parties; section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure therefore applied and the proceedings were quashed. The overall result was mixed: the sales tax claim failed, but the second prosecution was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:08:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164856" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (9) TMI 75 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127984</link>
      <description>Railway freight deducted by a dealer was held not to qualify as a cash discount under trade practice for exclusion from sale price under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, because section 2(14) permits only deductions recognised as cash discounts and section 2(20) cannot enlarge that allowance. The later criminal prosecution for the same tax arrears was treated as barred where it concerned part of the same amount already the subject of an earlier acquittal and an understanding between the parties; section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure therefore applied and the proceedings were quashed. The overall result was mixed: the sales tax claim failed, but the second prosecution was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127984</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>