<?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 (4) TMI 147 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152844</link>
    <description>In a hire-purchase transaction under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 as applicable to Delhi, the entire contractual consideration for transfer of the goods, including hire charges, finance charges and similar amounts, formed the sale price and was taxable when the transfer occurred. The Delhi HC distinguished Union territory sales tax legislation from State legislation and treated the transfer itself as the taxable sale. It also held that the Tribunal&#039;s view that tax arose only on exercise of the purchase option was contrary to the statutory scheme and was a jurisdictional error. The Tribunal orders were set aside in writ jurisdiction and the revenue position was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 29 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 17:39:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169881" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (4) TMI 147 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152844</link>
      <description>In a hire-purchase transaction under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 as applicable to Delhi, the entire contractual consideration for transfer of the goods, including hire charges, finance charges and similar amounts, formed the sale price and was taxable when the transfer occurred. The Delhi HC distinguished Union territory sales tax legislation from State legislation and treated the transfer itself as the taxable sale. It also held that the Tribunal&#039;s view that tax arose only on exercise of the purchase option was contrary to the statutory scheme and was a jurisdictional error. The Tribunal orders were set aside in writ jurisdiction and the revenue position was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 29 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>