<?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>1963 (11) TMI 72 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128936</link>
    <description>A sale is inter-State only where the contract itself makes movement of goods from one State to another an integral and necessary part of performance; mere despatch across State borders at the buyer&#039;s instruction, or delivery of railway receipts, is insufficient unless the movement is stipulated by the bargain. On the stated facts, buyers could take delivery within the State or direct despatch to destinations inside or outside the State, so crossing the border was not an essential contractual term and the sales did not qualify as inter-State sales. The article also notes that, in any event, retrospective validation legislation removed the constitutional bar for the relevant period, so the sales were taxable and included in turnover.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:06:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165805" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (11) TMI 72 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128936</link>
      <description>A sale is inter-State only where the contract itself makes movement of goods from one State to another an integral and necessary part of performance; mere despatch across State borders at the buyer&#039;s instruction, or delivery of railway receipts, is insufficient unless the movement is stipulated by the bargain. On the stated facts, buyers could take delivery within the State or direct despatch to destinations inside or outside the State, so crossing the border was not an essential contractual term and the sales did not qualify as inter-State sales. The article also notes that, in any event, retrospective validation legislation removed the constitutional bar for the relevant period, so the sales were taxable and included in turnover.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128936</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>