<?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>1965 (5) TMI 29 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128964</link>
    <description>Camphor was treated as a notified commodity under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 because it had been specified by notification under section 25 and the statutory definition covered such commodities before or after the 1958 Amendment Act. The definition of dealer also extended to a person selling notified commodities manufactured, made or processed by him in West Bengal. On a broad, ordinary meaning of process, converting camphor powder into camphor cubes by mechanical means amounted to processing and brought the assessee within the dealer definition. The assessee was therefore liable to be treated as a dealer under the Act, and the assessment challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:46:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (5) TMI 29 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128964</link>
      <description>Camphor was treated as a notified commodity under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 because it had been specified by notification under section 25 and the statutory definition covered such commodities before or after the 1958 Amendment Act. The definition of dealer also extended to a person selling notified commodities manufactured, made or processed by him in West Bengal. On a broad, ordinary meaning of process, converting camphor powder into camphor cubes by mechanical means amounted to processing and brought the assessee within the dealer definition. The assessee was therefore liable to be treated as a dealer under the Act, and the assessment challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>