<?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>1976 (2) TMI 153 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151108</link>
    <description>Alternative remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the appellate authority had already taken a definite view and the assessment orders disclosed apparent errors of law, so the writ petition was maintainable. Rent collected for storing meat and fish in cold storage was only storage rent, not consideration for sale, and was outside sales tax. Fish kept under refrigeration continued to fall within the exemption for fresh fish because exemption terms were read in their popular and commercial sense. Meat preserved by refrigeration was treated as frozen meat and therefore did not qualify for exemption. The assessment was unsustainable for fish turnover and storage rent, but meat turnover required reassessment under this interpretation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 15:04:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168147" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (2) TMI 153 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151108</link>
      <description>Alternative remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the appellate authority had already taken a definite view and the assessment orders disclosed apparent errors of law, so the writ petition was maintainable. Rent collected for storing meat and fish in cold storage was only storage rent, not consideration for sale, and was outside sales tax. Fish kept under refrigeration continued to fall within the exemption for fresh fish because exemption terms were read in their popular and commercial sense. Meat preserved by refrigeration was treated as frozen meat and therefore did not qualify for exemption. The assessment was unsustainable for fish turnover and storage rent, but meat turnover required reassessment under this interpretation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>