<?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>2007 (12) TMI 405 - Punjab-Haryana High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128221</link>
    <description>A contract for design, manufacture, supply, installation, testing and commissioning of lifts was treated as a contract of sale where the essential object was supply of lift goods in semi-knocked-down condition and installation was merely incidental. Applying the settled test for inter-State sale, the Court noted that the contract provided for movement of goods from one State to another pursuant to the agreement, so the transaction retained the character of an inter-State sale rather than a works contract. On that basis, detention of the goods and refusal to release them under the Punjab VAT law were held unjustified, and release of the goods was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2014 12:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165092" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 405 - Punjab-Haryana High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128221</link>
      <description>A contract for design, manufacture, supply, installation, testing and commissioning of lifts was treated as a contract of sale where the essential object was supply of lift goods in semi-knocked-down condition and installation was merely incidental. Applying the settled test for inter-State sale, the Court noted that the contract provided for movement of goods from one State to another pursuant to the agreement, so the transaction retained the character of an inter-State sale rather than a works contract. On that basis, detention of the goods and refusal to release them under the Punjab VAT law were held unjustified, and release of the goods was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>