<?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 96 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149989</link>
    <description>Supply of bricks under a control order was treated as sale transactions liable to sales tax because the regulatory regime did not exclude the essential elements of contract. Although licensing, permits, price fixation and compliance directions were controlled, the parties retained freedom over matters such as delivery date and place, payment, and transport arrangements. Earlier authority on controlled supplies was distinguished on facts, while the later steel-products authority was applied on the basis that a sale exists where mutual assent is not wholly excluded. The assessments were therefore upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 15:22:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (9) TMI 96 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149989</link>
      <description>Supply of bricks under a control order was treated as sale transactions liable to sales tax because the regulatory regime did not exclude the essential elements of contract. Although licensing, permits, price fixation and compliance directions were controlled, the parties retained freedom over matters such as delivery date and place, payment, and transport arrangements. Earlier authority on controlled supplies was distinguished on facts, while the later steel-products authority was applied on the basis that a sale exists where mutual assent is not wholly excluded. The assessments were therefore upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>