<?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 (9) TMI 46 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=133042</link>
    <description>Supply of posters and other publicity materials to film producers was treated as a sale because the accounts showed debit to the producers and credit to a publicity sale account, the assessee offered no satisfactory explanation that the handling charges were only service remuneration, and the contract required bills to be drawn against the distributor. Those facts supported the inference that the assessee printed the materials at its own cost, supplied them for consideration, and earned profit. The transactions therefore fell within the definition of sale and the assessee was held to be a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:51:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (9) TMI 46 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=133042</link>
      <description>Supply of posters and other publicity materials to film producers was treated as a sale because the accounts showed debit to the producers and credit to a publicity sale account, the assessee offered no satisfactory explanation that the handling charges were only service remuneration, and the contract required bills to be drawn against the distributor. Those facts supported the inference that the assessee printed the materials at its own cost, supplied them for consideration, and earned profit. The transactions therefore fell within the definition of sale and the assessee was held to be a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=133042</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>