<?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 (8) TMI 118 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151441</link>
    <description>Taxability of gunny bags used in packing salt depended on whether the containers were sold as such or were merely packing material, and that issue turned on the factual existence of an express or implied agreement for sale in each case. The trade circular did not impose a tax; it only reflected the administrative position on taxation of containers. A notice under section 14(1) seeking books of account, supporting records, final accounts and balance sheet to determine the factual basis of taxability was a legitimate step in assessment. The notice was therefore not without jurisdiction and did not call for interference under article 226.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:34:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (8) TMI 118 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151441</link>
      <description>Taxability of gunny bags used in packing salt depended on whether the containers were sold as such or were merely packing material, and that issue turned on the factual existence of an express or implied agreement for sale in each case. The trade circular did not impose a tax; it only reflected the administrative position on taxation of containers. A notice under section 14(1) seeking books of account, supporting records, final accounts and balance sheet to determine the factual basis of taxability was a legitimate step in assessment. The notice was therefore not without jurisdiction and did not call for interference under article 226.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151441</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>