<?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>1982 (1) TMI 164 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153145</link>
    <description>Garlic was treated as falling within the ordinary commercial and popular meaning of &quot;vegetables&quot; for sales tax purposes, because the relevant entry used a generic class description and specifically excluded certain items such as ginger, lemon and chillies. The express exclusion of garlic was read as showing that, absent that exclusion, garlic would ordinarily be covered by the entry. The classification was reinforced by the broader understanding that comparable items may fall within the term &quot;vegetables&quot; unless they are specifically excluded by notification. On that basis, garlic was held to be a vegetable for the relevant sales tax entry, and the issue was decided against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2013 16:23:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170181" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (1) TMI 164 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153145</link>
      <description>Garlic was treated as falling within the ordinary commercial and popular meaning of &quot;vegetables&quot; for sales tax purposes, because the relevant entry used a generic class description and specifically excluded certain items such as ginger, lemon and chillies. The express exclusion of garlic was read as showing that, absent that exclusion, garlic would ordinarily be covered by the entry. The classification was reinforced by the broader understanding that comparable items may fall within the term &quot;vegetables&quot; unless they are specifically excluded by notification. On that basis, garlic was held to be a vegetable for the relevant sales tax entry, and the issue was decided against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>