<?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 (11) TMI 102 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148257</link>
    <description>An Electricity Board engaged in generation, distribution and supply of electrical energy was not a dealer for sales tax purposes because electricity was not goods within the relevant sales tax enactments. Regular and continuous sales of coal-ash, a by-product arising from thermal generation, were treated as a business activity in that commodity and were taxable. By contrast, steam supplied to Nepa Mills on a cost-based arrangement without profit motive was not a taxable sale, and the supply of specification and tender forms was also outside the business of selling goods. Purchase tax on goods bought from unregistered dealers failed because the Board was not a dealer in respect of its electricity operations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166297" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (11) TMI 102 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148257</link>
      <description>An Electricity Board engaged in generation, distribution and supply of electrical energy was not a dealer for sales tax purposes because electricity was not goods within the relevant sales tax enactments. Regular and continuous sales of coal-ash, a by-product arising from thermal generation, were treated as a business activity in that commodity and were taxable. By contrast, steam supplied to Nepa Mills on a cost-based arrangement without profit motive was not a taxable sale, and the supply of specification and tender forms was also outside the business of selling goods. Purchase tax on goods bought from unregistered dealers failed because the Board was not a dealer in respect of its electricity operations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>