<?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 (1) TMI 69 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148283</link>
    <description>A commission agent is treated as a &quot;dealer&quot; under the U.P. Sales Tax Act only if, for the relevant period, he carried on the business of buying or selling goods on behalf of principals and had actual or constructive custody of the goods with authority to sell in his own name. The later amendment extending the definition to goods sold &quot;through&quot; such a person did not apply. On the facts, the sellers brought the goods themselves, remained present, and the sales were completed face to face at prices approved by them; purchase slips alone did not convert brokerage into dealer activity. The transactions were therefore brokerage arrangements, not taxable sales by the agent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:33:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (1) TMI 69 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148283</link>
      <description>A commission agent is treated as a &quot;dealer&quot; under the U.P. Sales Tax Act only if, for the relevant period, he carried on the business of buying or selling goods on behalf of principals and had actual or constructive custody of the goods with authority to sell in his own name. The later amendment extending the definition to goods sold &quot;through&quot; such a person did not apply. On the facts, the sellers brought the goods themselves, remained present, and the sales were completed face to face at prices approved by them; purchase slips alone did not convert brokerage into dealer activity. The transactions were therefore brokerage arrangements, not taxable sales by the agent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>