<?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 169 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151358</link>
    <description>Refund of State tax on declared goods sold in inter-State trade depends on strict compliance with the statutory conditions in the State Act and section 15(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act; an unamended delegated rule cannot enlarge that entitlement or override the parent statutes, so refund is unavailable where those conditions are not met. Section 10 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1969 applies only to exemption from Central sales tax for specified inter-State sales and does not govern refund of State tax already levied and collected, so it affords no relief. A discrimination challenge also fails because dealers who collected tax and those who did not form separate classes with a rational basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:47:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (2) TMI 169 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151358</link>
      <description>Refund of State tax on declared goods sold in inter-State trade depends on strict compliance with the statutory conditions in the State Act and section 15(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act; an unamended delegated rule cannot enlarge that entitlement or override the parent statutes, so refund is unavailable where those conditions are not met. Section 10 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1969 applies only to exemption from Central sales tax for specified inter-State sales and does not govern refund of State tax already levied and collected, so it affords no relief. A discrimination challenge also fails because dealers who collected tax and those who did not form separate classes with a rational basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>