<?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 (10) TMI 195 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152614</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the deposits collected by the liquor distributor were not taxable as part of the assessable turnover for sales tax purposes. The judgment emphasized that the deposits retained their character as deposits, indicating a bailment arrangement rather than sale prices. Drawing parallels with caution deposits for bottles, the court highlighted that even when deposits were forfeited, no sale occurred. The decision distinguished the case from precedent involving similar transactions, ultimately upholding that the deposits were not subject to taxation. Both revision petitions were dismissed, affirming that the deposits were non-taxable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2013 11:13:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169651" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (10) TMI 195 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152614</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the deposits collected by the liquor distributor were not taxable as part of the assessable turnover for sales tax purposes. The judgment emphasized that the deposits retained their character as deposits, indicating a bailment arrangement rather than sale prices. Drawing parallels with caution deposits for bottles, the court highlighted that even when deposits were forfeited, no sale occurred. The decision distinguished the case from precedent involving similar transactions, ultimately upholding that the deposits were not subject to taxation. Both revision petitions were dismissed, affirming that the deposits were non-taxable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>