<?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 (11) TMI 97 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150269</link>
    <description>Entry 14 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was construed to exempt cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks only when &quot;served&quot; in the ordinary course of eating-house service, meaning table service at the premises. The Gujarat HC held that the phrase did not extend to counter delivery or packed takeaway food supplied in a customer&#039;s utensils for consumption outside the eating house. The legislative context showed that the word &quot;outside&quot; enlarged the place of consumption, not the nature of the service. The disputed turnover therefore fell outside the exemption and remained liable to sales tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2013 10:01:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (11) TMI 97 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150269</link>
      <description>Entry 14 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was construed to exempt cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks only when &quot;served&quot; in the ordinary course of eating-house service, meaning table service at the premises. The Gujarat HC held that the phrase did not extend to counter delivery or packed takeaway food supplied in a customer&#039;s utensils for consumption outside the eating house. The legislative context showed that the word &quot;outside&quot; enlarged the place of consumption, not the nature of the service. The disputed turnover therefore fell outside the exemption and remained liable to sales tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>