<?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 (1) TMI 96 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150483</link>
    <description>A notification issued on 25 November 1958 operated as an exemption under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and could not be treated as a charging provision for the earlier assessment years 1956-57 and 1957-58. Exclusion of khandsari sugar from the exemption did not by itself create tax liability. For the later years, the single-point levy applied only to sale by the importer or manufacturer of khandsari sugar. Kulia khand was found to be only another form of khandsari sugar, and the assessee, having prepared it from locally purchased khandsari sugar, was neither importer nor manufacturer. A second levy on the same commodity was therefore impermissible, and the question was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 14:28:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (1) TMI 96 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150483</link>
      <description>A notification issued on 25 November 1958 operated as an exemption under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and could not be treated as a charging provision for the earlier assessment years 1956-57 and 1957-58. Exclusion of khandsari sugar from the exemption did not by itself create tax liability. For the later years, the single-point levy applied only to sale by the importer or manufacturer of khandsari sugar. Kulia khand was found to be only another form of khandsari sugar, and the assessee, having prepared it from locally purchased khandsari sugar, was neither importer nor manufacturer. A second levy on the same commodity was therefore impermissible, and the question was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>