<?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>1966 (12) TMI 59 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146237</link>
    <description>Brick supplies made only against permits issued under a statutory control order were held not to be sales for sales tax purposes. The HC applied the test of a contract of sale requiring mutual assent and freedom of volition, and found that the manufacturer or dealer could not refuse, vary, or negotiate the quantity or time of delivery once a permit was produced. Because the control regime removed the essential element of consensual bargain, the transactions did not fall within the sales tax definition. Tax could therefore not be levied on such supplies, and the assessment orders were quashed to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:50:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (12) TMI 59 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146237</link>
      <description>Brick supplies made only against permits issued under a statutory control order were held not to be sales for sales tax purposes. The HC applied the test of a contract of sale requiring mutual assent and freedom of volition, and found that the manufacturer or dealer could not refuse, vary, or negotiate the quantity or time of delivery once a permit was produced. Because the control regime removed the essential element of consensual bargain, the transactions did not fall within the sales tax definition. Tax could therefore not be levied on such supplies, and the assessment orders were quashed to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>