<?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 (10) TMI 98 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148628</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the revenue authorities, upholding the assessment of sales tax on transactions involving the sale of gold jewels. The court considered the transactions as sales of goods, emphasizing the importance of money consideration in determining a sale. It expanded the definition of money consideration to include assets like gold, viewing gold as a form of money due to its role in the monetary system. The court found the penalties imposed by the revenue authorities justified, except for penalties related to complex legal interpretations, which were not upheld. The petitions were dismissed with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 14:14:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (10) TMI 98 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148628</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the revenue authorities, upholding the assessment of sales tax on transactions involving the sale of gold jewels. The court considered the transactions as sales of goods, emphasizing the importance of money consideration in determining a sale. It expanded the definition of money consideration to include assets like gold, viewing gold as a form of money due to its role in the monetary system. The court found the penalties imposed by the revenue authorities justified, except for penalties related to complex legal interpretations, which were not upheld. The petitions were dismissed with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148628</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>