<?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>1969 (4) TMI 95 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148712</link>
    <description>A levy on mica under the amended Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was upheld against constitutional challenge. The court treated the tax as one at the last purchase point within the State and held that it was not shown to tax the export transaction itself, so Article 286 and the export-protection provisions were not violated. It further held that a tax does not offend Article 301 merely because it may indirectly affect trade; the levy was not a direct and immediate restriction on commerce. The objections based on Presidential assent and legislative competence were also rejected, and the writ petitions were dismissed with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 14:20:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (4) TMI 95 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148712</link>
      <description>A levy on mica under the amended Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was upheld against constitutional challenge. The court treated the tax as one at the last purchase point within the State and held that it was not shown to tax the export transaction itself, so Article 286 and the export-protection provisions were not violated. It further held that a tax does not offend Article 301 merely because it may indirectly affect trade; the levy was not a direct and immediate restriction on commerce. The objections based on Presidential assent and legislative competence were also rejected, and the writ petitions were dismissed with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148712</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>