<?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>1979 (7) TMI 215 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152382</link>
    <description>A tractor-trailer does not qualify as &quot;machinery&quot; for sales tax classification because machinery, in common legal parlance, must be a mechanically integrated contrivance with interrelated parts working together to perform work or produce a definite result; a trailer that merely moves when attached to a tractor does not meet that test. It is also not an &quot;accessory&quot; of a tractor, since an accessory must add to the principal machine&#039;s beauty, convenience, or effectiveness, and a load-carrying trailer does not do so. On that basis, the higher levy under item 20 of the Second Schedule could not be sustained, and the original treatment of tractor-trailers as non-scheduled goods was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2013 18:38:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169420" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (7) TMI 215 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152382</link>
      <description>A tractor-trailer does not qualify as &quot;machinery&quot; for sales tax classification because machinery, in common legal parlance, must be a mechanically integrated contrivance with interrelated parts working together to perform work or produce a definite result; a trailer that merely moves when attached to a tractor does not meet that test. It is also not an &quot;accessory&quot; of a tractor, since an accessory must add to the principal machine&#039;s beauty, convenience, or effectiveness, and a load-carrying trailer does not do so. On that basis, the higher levy under item 20 of the Second Schedule could not be sustained, and the original treatment of tractor-trailers as non-scheduled goods was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152382</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>