<?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>1968 (11) TMI 88 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148529</link>
    <description>Preparation of medicines in accordance with prescriptions was treated as not amounting to manufacture of medicines and pharmaceutical preparations for the relevant notification, so the appellant could not be regarded as a dealer liable under the Act on that basis. The revisional authority&#039;s interference with the appellate order was unsustainable because the controlling legal position, as affirmed by the Supreme Court&#039;s approval of the Allahabad High Court view in an analogous matter, supported the appellant&#039;s case. The revisional order was quashed and the appellate order in favour of the appellant was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:05:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (11) TMI 88 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148529</link>
      <description>Preparation of medicines in accordance with prescriptions was treated as not amounting to manufacture of medicines and pharmaceutical preparations for the relevant notification, so the appellant could not be regarded as a dealer liable under the Act on that basis. The revisional authority&#039;s interference with the appellate order was unsustainable because the controlling legal position, as affirmed by the Supreme Court&#039;s approval of the Allahabad High Court view in an analogous matter, supported the appellant&#039;s case. The revisional order was quashed and the appellate order in favour of the appellant was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>