<?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 (3) TMI 94 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=145220</link>
    <description>Section 7(4) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 was read as permitting amendment of a registration certificate on information received from any source, including the authority&#039;s own knowledge, and not only on information furnished under section 16; the jurisdictional challenge therefore failed. Under section 5(2)(a)(ii), packing materials form a separate deductible category distinct from goods used in manufacture. Paper and ink used for cartons, labels and directions were not deductible on the manufacture limb, but the packing-material question could not be rejected by conflating the two categories, so the matter required a fresh finding on that aspect.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:56:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (3) TMI 94 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=145220</link>
      <description>Section 7(4) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 was read as permitting amendment of a registration certificate on information received from any source, including the authority&#039;s own knowledge, and not only on information furnished under section 16; the jurisdictional challenge therefore failed. Under section 5(2)(a)(ii), packing materials form a separate deductible category distinct from goods used in manufacture. Paper and ink used for cartons, labels and directions were not deductible on the manufacture limb, but the packing-material question could not be rejected by conflating the two categories, so the matter required a fresh finding on that aspect.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=145220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>