<?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 (5) TMI 142 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152922</link>
    <description>A forestry arrangement must be classified by its substance, not its label: where the document merely permits entry to cut and remove bamboo without conferring possession of land, it is a licence and not a lease. On that basis, the bamboo receipts were treated as consideration for a sale of goods and were liable to sales tax under the Bihar Sales Tax Act. The State&#039;s notifications withdrawing bamboo from exemption and fixing a higher rate were upheld as within the statutory power to grant and withdraw exemption and to notify the applicable rate. A simple statutory tax demand did not by itself require a separate hearing, so no breach of natural justice was shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:12:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (5) TMI 142 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152922</link>
      <description>A forestry arrangement must be classified by its substance, not its label: where the document merely permits entry to cut and remove bamboo without conferring possession of land, it is a licence and not a lease. On that basis, the bamboo receipts were treated as consideration for a sale of goods and were liable to sales tax under the Bihar Sales Tax Act. The State&#039;s notifications withdrawing bamboo from exemption and fixing a higher rate were upheld as within the statutory power to grant and withdraw exemption and to notify the applicable rate. A simple statutory tax demand did not by itself require a separate hearing, so no breach of natural justice was shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>