<?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 (10) TMI 54 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144072</link>
    <description>Electric fans were held to fall within the expression &quot;domestic electrical appliances&quot; in entry 52 of Schedule B, applying the ordinary commercial or common parlance test rather than a restrictive primary-use approach; the fact that fans may also be used in offices did not take them outside the specific entry, so they were not relegated to the residuary entry 80. On penalty, section 16 was read as an integrated scheme: tax due according to the return had to be paid before furnishing the return, but default for section 16(4) arose only if the dealer failed to comply with notice under section 16(5). Penalty was therefore not attracted merely for non-payment before filing the return.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:10:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (10) TMI 54 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144072</link>
      <description>Electric fans were held to fall within the expression &quot;domestic electrical appliances&quot; in entry 52 of Schedule B, applying the ordinary commercial or common parlance test rather than a restrictive primary-use approach; the fact that fans may also be used in offices did not take them outside the specific entry, so they were not relegated to the residuary entry 80. On penalty, section 16 was read as an integrated scheme: tax due according to the return had to be paid before furnishing the return, but default for section 16(4) arose only if the dealer failed to comply with notice under section 16(5). Penalty was therefore not attracted merely for non-payment before filing the return.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>