<?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>1972 (8) TMI 123 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150467</link>
    <description>Silk yarn prepared by reeling cocoon filaments on a charka was treated as hand-spun yarn for purposes of the exemption, because &quot;hand-spun&quot; was construed as an ordinary commercial term and not a term of art. The Court relied on dictionary meaning, trade usage and administrative practice, and accepted that manual picking, twisting and reeling of the filaments produced hand-spun silk yarn notwithstanding the cocoon&#039;s natural emission of filaments. The exemption was understood as supporting cottage industry and self-employment, so the sale was exempt from tax. Assessment-revision notices seeking to tax the transactions were therefore misconceived and the writ of prohibition was properly issued.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 12:08:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167507" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (8) TMI 123 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150467</link>
      <description>Silk yarn prepared by reeling cocoon filaments on a charka was treated as hand-spun yarn for purposes of the exemption, because &quot;hand-spun&quot; was construed as an ordinary commercial term and not a term of art. The Court relied on dictionary meaning, trade usage and administrative practice, and accepted that manual picking, twisting and reeling of the filaments produced hand-spun silk yarn notwithstanding the cocoon&#039;s natural emission of filaments. The exemption was understood as supporting cottage industry and self-employment, so the sale was exempt from tax. Assessment-revision notices seeking to tax the transactions were therefore misconceived and the writ of prohibition was properly issued.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150467</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>