<?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>1974 (3) TMI 101 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150867</link>
    <description>Small nails used as shoe material were treated as taxable hardware under the relevant notification because the term &quot;hardware&quot; was construed according to settled trade usage and earlier Division Bench authority, which had already included small base-metal items such as nails within that description. Applying that ordinary commercial understanding, the commodity fell within the notification&#039;s scope and remained taxable as hardware in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 17:05:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167907" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (3) TMI 101 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150867</link>
      <description>Small nails used as shoe material were treated as taxable hardware under the relevant notification because the term &quot;hardware&quot; was construed according to settled trade usage and earlier Division Bench authority, which had already included small base-metal items such as nails within that description. Applying that ordinary commercial understanding, the commodity fell within the notification&#039;s scope and remained taxable as hardware in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150867</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>