<?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 (3) TMI 122 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151027</link>
    <description>The arrangement for manufacturing appalams at Kallidaikurichi was treated as a joint venture for manufacture and division of goods, not as sales to the partnership firm or the individual partners. The court noted that no capital was invested by the partners in the manufacturing unit, raw materials were purchased by the two individuals, and the finished appalams were lifted by the firm and the partners for sale on their own account. Manufacturing expenses were then computed and allocated according to the quantities lifted. On those facts, the distribution of the appalams was not a sale exigible to sales tax, and the assessment could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 May 2013 15:47:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168066" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (3) TMI 122 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151027</link>
      <description>The arrangement for manufacturing appalams at Kallidaikurichi was treated as a joint venture for manufacture and division of goods, not as sales to the partnership firm or the individual partners. The court noted that no capital was invested by the partners in the manufacturing unit, raw materials were purchased by the two individuals, and the finished appalams were lifted by the firm and the partners for sale on their own account. Manufacturing expenses were then computed and allocated according to the quantities lifted. On those facts, the distribution of the appalams was not a sale exigible to sales tax, and the assessment could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151027</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>