<?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>1975 (1) TMI 71 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150833</link>
    <description>Cartage and transport charges shown separately in invoices were held to form part of the sale price where the underlying contract fixed an all-inclusive price and delivery at the purchaser&#039;s site was part of the seller&#039;s obligation. The statutory exclusion for freight or delivery cost applies only when such cost is separately charged under the contract and the purchaser is bound to pay it as a separate liability. Mere invoice splitting could not change the original bargain or create a distinct charge. The charges therefore could not be deducted from turnover of sales, and the issue was resolved in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 12:35:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (1) TMI 71 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150833</link>
      <description>Cartage and transport charges shown separately in invoices were held to form part of the sale price where the underlying contract fixed an all-inclusive price and delivery at the purchaser&#039;s site was part of the seller&#039;s obligation. The statutory exclusion for freight or delivery cost applies only when such cost is separately charged under the contract and the purchaser is bound to pay it as a separate liability. Mere invoice splitting could not change the original bargain or create a distinct charge. The charges therefore could not be deducted from turnover of sales, and the issue was resolved in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>