<?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 (7) TMI 109 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150915</link>
    <description>Transportation charges paid under contracts requiring delivery of sugarcane f.o.r. factory premises formed part of the purchase price where they were directly linked to the quantity supplied and enhanced the agreed contract price. Such amounts were therefore includible in taxable purchase turnover and liable to tax under the purchase-point provision. Sugarcane setts, treated as seed, were not commercially understood as sugarcane. In the absence of a statutory definition, &quot;sugarcane&quot; takes its ordinary commercial meaning; an agreement to supply sugarcane is not satisfied by supplying setts. Setts were consequently taxable under the general charging provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 16:26:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167954" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (7) TMI 109 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150915</link>
      <description>Transportation charges paid under contracts requiring delivery of sugarcane f.o.r. factory premises formed part of the purchase price where they were directly linked to the quantity supplied and enhanced the agreed contract price. Such amounts were therefore includible in taxable purchase turnover and liable to tax under the purchase-point provision. Sugarcane setts, treated as seed, were not commercially understood as sugarcane. In the absence of a statutory definition, &quot;sugarcane&quot; takes its ordinary commercial meaning; an agreement to supply sugarcane is not satisfied by supplying setts. Setts were consequently taxable under the general charging provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150915</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>