<?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>1978 (3) TMI 191 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152137</link>
    <description>The legislature was competent to enhance sales tax and classify liquors for taxation, provided the classification was reasonable; the amended item 26 was therefore upheld because it created no hostile discrimination and granted only a concessional rate where the sale consideration already included excise duty payable under the excise law. The provision did not itself include excise duty in turnover or compel a result contrary to the principle that excise duty paid directly by buyers is outside turnover. The challenge of colourable exercise of power also failed, as the amendment merely conferred a benefit on dealers in such liquor.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:27:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (3) TMI 191 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152137</link>
      <description>The legislature was competent to enhance sales tax and classify liquors for taxation, provided the classification was reasonable; the amended item 26 was therefore upheld because it created no hostile discrimination and granted only a concessional rate where the sale consideration already included excise duty payable under the excise law. The provision did not itself include excise duty in turnover or compel a result contrary to the principle that excise duty paid directly by buyers is outside turnover. The challenge of colourable exercise of power also failed, as the amendment merely conferred a benefit on dealers in such liquor.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>