<?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 (1) TMI 165 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151304</link>
    <description>Section 17 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 applies only where the ownership of a registered dealer&#039;s business is absolutely transferred; a managing contractor arrangement that leaves the principals&#039; ownership intact and limits the transferees to management does not satisfy that condition. For transactions under the Colliery Control Order, 1945, a sale under section 2(g) still depends on transfer of property in goods for consideration with contractual assent; regulation by a control order does not by itself exclude sale. Whether particular transactions lacked mutuality or contractual freedom had to be examined on their facts, so the assessment notice was not premature and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2013 18:04:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (1) TMI 165 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151304</link>
      <description>Section 17 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 applies only where the ownership of a registered dealer&#039;s business is absolutely transferred; a managing contractor arrangement that leaves the principals&#039; ownership intact and limits the transferees to management does not satisfy that condition. For transactions under the Colliery Control Order, 1945, a sale under section 2(g) still depends on transfer of property in goods for consideration with contractual assent; regulation by a control order does not by itself exclude sale. Whether particular transactions lacked mutuality or contractual freedom had to be examined on their facts, so the assessment notice was not premature and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151304</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>