<?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 155 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153072</link>
    <description>Supplies of materials by a construction contractor to sub-contractors and consortium members were not sales exigible to tax because the contract kept the materials as Government property for use at site, and book entries or work-account adjustments did not amount to a transfer of property in goods. Sales of scrap, unserviceable and surplus materials were also not taxable, as the contractor&#039;s main business was construction and such incidental disposals did not amount to carrying on the business of selling goods. The underlying Government contract was held to be indivisible, since it related to one specified project and internal allocation of work did not split it into separate contracts. The applicant was therefore not liable to sales tax on those transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:48:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (4) TMI 155 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153072</link>
      <description>Supplies of materials by a construction contractor to sub-contractors and consortium members were not sales exigible to tax because the contract kept the materials as Government property for use at site, and book entries or work-account adjustments did not amount to a transfer of property in goods. Sales of scrap, unserviceable and surplus materials were also not taxable, as the contractor&#039;s main business was construction and such incidental disposals did not amount to carrying on the business of selling goods. The underlying Government contract was held to be indivisible, since it related to one specified project and internal allocation of work did not split it into separate contracts. The applicant was therefore not liable to sales tax on those transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>