<?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 (9) TMI 137 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148337</link>
    <description>A contract for manufacture and supply of bricks was treated as a works contract, not a sale, because the materials remained under the customer&#039;s control, the contractor worked under strict restrictions, and the bricks were deemed to remain the customer&#039;s property through manufacture and delivery; the turnover was therefore not liable to sales tax on that footing. Transport charges were not excluded from taxable turnover because the statute required separate specification and separate charging, and no such bills were produced. The result was partly in favour of the assessee on the works contract issue, but the deduction claim for transport charges failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:23:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (9) TMI 137 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148337</link>
      <description>A contract for manufacture and supply of bricks was treated as a works contract, not a sale, because the materials remained under the customer&#039;s control, the contractor worked under strict restrictions, and the bricks were deemed to remain the customer&#039;s property through manufacture and delivery; the turnover was therefore not liable to sales tax on that footing. Transport charges were not excluded from taxable turnover because the statute required separate specification and separate charging, and no such bills were produced. The result was partly in favour of the assessee on the works contract issue, but the deduction claim for transport charges failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148337</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>