<?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>1960 (3) TMI 37 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128033</link>
    <description>Rule 5(2) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Rules, 1950 was construed as applying only where the assessee carried on business in the very commodity purchased. A dealer&#039;s status in another line of business was insufficient, and the term &quot;business&quot; in section 2(e) was given a commercial sense tied to dealings in that commodity itself. Goods bought merely for consumption or use in an unrelated activity did not form taxable turnover under the rule. On that basis, tanning bark purchased for use in tanning hides and skins was held outside rule 5(2) and the purchase turnover was not liable to sales tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:09:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (3) TMI 37 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128033</link>
      <description>Rule 5(2) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Rules, 1950 was construed as applying only where the assessee carried on business in the very commodity purchased. A dealer&#039;s status in another line of business was insufficient, and the term &quot;business&quot; in section 2(e) was given a commercial sense tied to dealings in that commodity itself. Goods bought merely for consumption or use in an unrelated activity did not form taxable turnover under the rule. On that basis, tanning bark purchased for use in tanning hides and skins was held outside rule 5(2) and the purchase turnover was not liable to sales tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>