<?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 200 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152360</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petition, setting aside the assessment of sales tax on hessian and hoops, as there was no express or implied agreement for their sale. The court held that the petition fell within the ambit of Article 226(1)(b) of the Constitution, allowing the petitioners to challenge the assessment. The final judgment granted costs to the petitioners and ordered the refund of the security amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:41:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (3) TMI 200 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152360</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petition, setting aside the assessment of sales tax on hessian and hoops, as there was no express or implied agreement for their sale. The court held that the petition fell within the ambit of Article 226(1)(b) of the Constitution, allowing the petitioners to challenge the assessment. The final judgment granted costs to the petitioners and ordered the refund of the security amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>