<?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 (3) TMI 225 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153178</link>
    <description>Assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act was invalid because section 4 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act is only a charging provision and does not authorise a separate proceeding to determine liability before assessment. Delegation under rule 71 of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules also did not empower the Commercial Tax Officer to make that determination. Separately, supplies from the factory, made to use surplus capacity and meet governmental and defence requirements rather than through regular profit-oriented trading, lacked the commercial character of business under the pre-amendment regime. The assessment and consequential demand therefore could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:29:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170214" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (3) TMI 225 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153178</link>
      <description>Assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act was invalid because section 4 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act is only a charging provision and does not authorise a separate proceeding to determine liability before assessment. Delegation under rule 71 of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules also did not empower the Commercial Tax Officer to make that determination. Separately, supplies from the factory, made to use surplus capacity and meet governmental and defence requirements rather than through regular profit-oriented trading, lacked the commercial character of business under the pre-amendment regime. The assessment and consequential demand therefore could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>