<?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>1977 (6) TMI 97 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152532</link>
    <description>A port trust was held not to be a dealer for sales tax purposes where the disputed receipts arose from statutory port functions rather than trading activity. Supply of water to visiting vessels, bunkering, tender-document charges, and supply of water or stores to contractors and staff were treated as incidental services connected with port operations, not independent business ventures. Disposal of surplus or unserviceable material also did not amount to business because there was no intention to carry on trade in those materials. On that basis, the sales tax authorities lacked jurisdiction to assess those transactions to tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2013 12:58:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (6) TMI 97 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152532</link>
      <description>A port trust was held not to be a dealer for sales tax purposes where the disputed receipts arose from statutory port functions rather than trading activity. Supply of water to visiting vessels, bunkering, tender-document charges, and supply of water or stores to contractors and staff were treated as incidental services connected with port operations, not independent business ventures. Disposal of surplus or unserviceable material also did not amount to business because there was no intention to carry on trade in those materials. On that basis, the sales tax authorities lacked jurisdiction to assess those transactions to tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>