<?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>1964 (1) TMI 36 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128826</link>
    <description>An exemption entry under the Mysore Sales Tax Act became operative on its stated commencement date, and its effect was not postponed merely because rules 25A and 25B providing procedural machinery were framed later. Karadi oil sales could therefore qualify for exemption from the entry&#039;s commencement if the substantive conditions, including recognition of the producer, were met. The absence of rules allowing the dealer to pass the tax burden to purchasers did not affect the competence of the levy or invalidate the assessment. The petitions were allowed, the Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside, and the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:35:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (1) TMI 36 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128826</link>
      <description>An exemption entry under the Mysore Sales Tax Act became operative on its stated commencement date, and its effect was not postponed merely because rules 25A and 25B providing procedural machinery were framed later. Karadi oil sales could therefore qualify for exemption from the entry&#039;s commencement if the substantive conditions, including recognition of the producer, were met. The absence of rules allowing the dealer to pass the tax burden to purchasers did not affect the competence of the levy or invalidate the assessment. The petitions were allowed, the Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside, and the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>