<?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 (7) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=139054</link>
    <description>An auctioneer is not treated as a dealer liable to sales tax where he merely advertises and conducts the auction for a principal, secures bids, and does not himself accept the highest offer or transfer the goods. The court noted that the principal&#039;s representative had authority to accept or reject the bid, the offer was accepted on the spot by that representative, and the auctioneer had no dominion over the property or role in completing the sale. Receipt of the sale price and issuance of the bill under special instructions did not convert the auctioneer into a person carrying on the business of buying and selling goods on behalf of the principal. Sales tax liability therefore did not arise on the disputed turnover.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:24:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165981" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (7) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=139054</link>
      <description>An auctioneer is not treated as a dealer liable to sales tax where he merely advertises and conducts the auction for a principal, secures bids, and does not himself accept the highest offer or transfer the goods. The court noted that the principal&#039;s representative had authority to accept or reject the bid, the offer was accepted on the spot by that representative, and the auctioneer had no dominion over the property or role in completing the sale. Receipt of the sale price and issuance of the bill under special instructions did not convert the auctioneer into a person carrying on the business of buying and selling goods on behalf of the principal. Sales tax liability therefore did not arise on the disputed turnover.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=139054</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>