<?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 (11) TMI 132 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150982</link>
    <description>An exemption entry for rayon fabrics was interpreted to cover goods made wholly or substantially from rayon or artificial silk, not a single specific article. Applying that material-composition approach, caristrap rayon cord strapping was treated as fabricated essentially and substantially from rayon and was held exempt from sales tax. On writ jurisdiction, the existence of an alternate statutory remedy did not justify refusal under Article 226 because the petitions had already been entertained, notice issued, and the matters heard on merits after substantial delay. The assessment challenge therefore succeeded and the impugned judgment was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 May 2013 11:03:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168021" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (11) TMI 132 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150982</link>
      <description>An exemption entry for rayon fabrics was interpreted to cover goods made wholly or substantially from rayon or artificial silk, not a single specific article. Applying that material-composition approach, caristrap rayon cord strapping was treated as fabricated essentially and substantially from rayon and was held exempt from sales tax. On writ jurisdiction, the existence of an alternate statutory remedy did not justify refusal under Article 226 because the petitions had already been entertained, notice issued, and the matters heard on merits after substantial delay. The assessment challenge therefore succeeded and the impugned judgment was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150982</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>