<?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 181 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144191</link>
    <description>An association that merely procures maida and other requirements for its members, pays the allotment value on their behalf, obtains delivery orders, and distributes the goods to members does not carry on the business of buying or selling goods. On those facts, its collecting-and-distributing function was held insufficient to satisfy the definition of &quot;dealer&quot; under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, so it was not liable to sales tax. The department&#039;s reliance on the absence of objections to the provisional assessment was also rejected because the association had already made clear that it denied tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 14:10:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (4) TMI 181 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144191</link>
      <description>An association that merely procures maida and other requirements for its members, pays the allotment value on their behalf, obtains delivery orders, and distributes the goods to members does not carry on the business of buying or selling goods. On those facts, its collecting-and-distributing function was held insufficient to satisfy the definition of &quot;dealer&quot; under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, so it was not liable to sales tax. The department&#039;s reliance on the absence of objections to the provisional assessment was also rejected because the association had already made clear that it denied tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>