<?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>1977 (3) TMI 136 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151305</link>
    <description>A supply arrangement for collecting, breaking and delivering stone did not amount to a sale because property in the goods remained with the State and royalty for collection did not transfer ownership; sales tax was therefore not attracted. The Court also held that writ relief was maintainable against notices and the assessment order, since the notices were not determinative orders and the tax demand, lacking legal authority on a non-taxable transaction, fell within constitutional writ jurisdiction. The alternative-remedy bar under article 226(3) was accordingly inapplicable. The assessment and consequential notices could not stand and the matter was remitted for fresh decision in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2013 18:09:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (3) TMI 136 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151305</link>
      <description>A supply arrangement for collecting, breaking and delivering stone did not amount to a sale because property in the goods remained with the State and royalty for collection did not transfer ownership; sales tax was therefore not attracted. The Court also held that writ relief was maintainable against notices and the assessment order, since the notices were not determinative orders and the tax demand, lacking legal authority on a non-taxable transaction, fell within constitutional writ jurisdiction. The alternative-remedy bar under article 226(3) was accordingly inapplicable. The assessment and consequential notices could not stand and the matter was remitted for fresh decision in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>