<?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 (12) TMI 83 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150134</link>
    <description>A contract for manufacture and supply of kiln-burnt bricks was characterised by its substance and essential character, not by sale-like wording. The arrangement required production on Government land, use of Government-provided land and earth, strict supervision, restrictions on outside sale, and compulsory purchase by the Government even of inferior bricks and brick-bats. These features showed that the contractor was engaged to apply labour and skill to produce bricks for the Government, with any transfer of property being only incidental. The transaction was therefore treated as a works contract, or at least a composite and indivisible contract of work and labour, and not a sale of bricks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 12:16:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (12) TMI 83 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150134</link>
      <description>A contract for manufacture and supply of kiln-burnt bricks was characterised by its substance and essential character, not by sale-like wording. The arrangement required production on Government land, use of Government-provided land and earth, strict supervision, restrictions on outside sale, and compulsory purchase by the Government even of inferior bricks and brick-bats. These features showed that the contractor was engaged to apply labour and skill to produce bricks for the Government, with any transfer of property being only incidental. The transaction was therefore treated as a works contract, or at least a composite and indivisible contract of work and labour, and not a sale of bricks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>