<?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>1970 (9) TMI 92 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149881</link>
    <description>An agreement described as a sale of coal output was construed as an outright contract of sale, not an agency arrangement, because its terms used sale language and fixed delivery, payment and despatch conditions. The expression &quot;selling commission&quot; did not, by itself, convert the transaction into agency, especially where the surrounding commercial setting and the assessee&#039;s own conduct pointed to dealer status, including registration, use of declaration forms and prior treatment of receipts as turnover. On that construction, the assessee was a dealer and the relevant turnover was liable to tax under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 May 2013 16:58:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166922" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (9) TMI 92 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149881</link>
      <description>An agreement described as a sale of coal output was construed as an outright contract of sale, not an agency arrangement, because its terms used sale language and fixed delivery, payment and despatch conditions. The expression &quot;selling commission&quot; did not, by itself, convert the transaction into agency, especially where the surrounding commercial setting and the assessee&#039;s own conduct pointed to dealer status, including registration, use of declaration forms and prior treatment of receipts as turnover. On that construction, the assessee was a dealer and the relevant turnover was liable to tax under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>