<?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>1962 (12) TMI 33 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128574</link>
    <description>A commission agent selling goods for non-resident principals in Uttar Pradesh was treated as a dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act because the definition of dealer covered a person carrying on the business of selling and supplying goods, including sales effected through an agent. The scheme of the Act and the licensing provisions for agents supported that construction. Weighing dues charged to buyers were also held to form part of the sale proceeds, since weighing was incidental to the sale and delivery of the goods and the charge arose from the sale transaction. Retention of that amount by the agent did not exclude it from turnover.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:55:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (12) TMI 33 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128574</link>
      <description>A commission agent selling goods for non-resident principals in Uttar Pradesh was treated as a dealer under the U.P. Sales Tax Act because the definition of dealer covered a person carrying on the business of selling and supplying goods, including sales effected through an agent. The scheme of the Act and the licensing provisions for agents supported that construction. Weighing dues charged to buyers were also held to form part of the sale proceeds, since weighing was incidental to the sale and delivery of the goods and the charge arose from the sale transaction. Retention of that amount by the agent did not exclude it from turnover.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>