<?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 (2) TMI 102 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150856</link>
    <description>Repairing old drums by removing dents and leakages did not amount to manufacture under section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 because the process did not create a commercially different commodity. The repaired drums remained commercially the same as the original drums, so mere repair or reconditioning was insufficient to attract manufacture-based tax treatment. The analysis distinguished the Factories Act as a social welfare statute with a broader, express treatment of certain processes as manufacturing processes, unlike the sales tax statute. On that basis, the turnover provision did not change the conclusion, and the answer was in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167896" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (2) TMI 102 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150856</link>
      <description>Repairing old drums by removing dents and leakages did not amount to manufacture under section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 because the process did not create a commercially different commodity. The repaired drums remained commercially the same as the original drums, so mere repair or reconditioning was insufficient to attract manufacture-based tax treatment. The analysis distinguished the Factories Act as a social welfare statute with a broader, express treatment of certain processes as manufacturing processes, unlike the sales tax statute. On that basis, the turnover provision did not change the conclusion, and the answer was in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>