<?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>1967 (4) TMI 179 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144180</link>
    <description>In sales tax law, the term &quot;manganese&quot; was construed in its popular and commercial sense, not scientifically, and was held not to include manganese ore because trade treated them as distinct commodities. On that basis, the levy at six pies in the rupee on purchase turnover could not be sustained. The Tribunal&#039;s direction for fresh assessment on the footing that manganese ore was taxable as general goods at the sale point was held to be within jurisdiction, since it did not predetermine the assessment and allowed the assessee a full opportunity in reassessment. The classification issue was decided for the assessee, and the remand was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:33:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166178" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (4) TMI 179 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144180</link>
      <description>In sales tax law, the term &quot;manganese&quot; was construed in its popular and commercial sense, not scientifically, and was held not to include manganese ore because trade treated them as distinct commodities. On that basis, the levy at six pies in the rupee on purchase turnover could not be sustained. The Tribunal&#039;s direction for fresh assessment on the footing that manganese ore was taxable as general goods at the sale point was held to be within jurisdiction, since it did not predetermine the assessment and allowed the assessee a full opportunity in reassessment. The classification issue was decided for the assessee, and the remand was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>