<?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 110 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150922</link>
    <description>Green gram and black gram processed into dal were treated as commercially distinct commodities, because the change in form altered their identity in ordinary market understanding. On that basis, the sale of dal was not a resale of the goods in the same form in which they were purchased. The proviso to section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 applies where goods bought on declaration are used otherwise than as declared, so the original purchase value is brought back into taxable turnover. A declaration referring to a class of goods did not prevent the proviso from operating when the purchased goods and the sold goods were substantively different.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 17:18:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (7) TMI 110 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150922</link>
      <description>Green gram and black gram processed into dal were treated as commercially distinct commodities, because the change in form altered their identity in ordinary market understanding. On that basis, the sale of dal was not a resale of the goods in the same form in which they were purchased. The proviso to section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 applies where goods bought on declaration are used otherwise than as declared, so the original purchase value is brought back into taxable turnover. A declaration referring to a class of goods did not prevent the proviso from operating when the purchased goods and the sold goods were substantively different.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>