<?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>1983 (2) TMI 258 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153474</link>
    <description>Rule 5A of the Kerala Central Sales Tax Rules was held to remain valid because it operated consistently with the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules in the same field. Section 6A places the burden on the dealer to prove transfer otherwise than by sale and permits prescribed declarations, while the statute also authorises both Central and State rule-making on declaration particulars. The State requirement for additional particulars did not conflict with the Central form F regime, and concurrent compliance was possible. No implied repeal or supersession arose, so the dealer had to furnish the particulars required by the State rule.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:31:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (2) TMI 258 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153474</link>
      <description>Rule 5A of the Kerala Central Sales Tax Rules was held to remain valid because it operated consistently with the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules in the same field. Section 6A places the burden on the dealer to prove transfer otherwise than by sale and permits prescribed declarations, while the statute also authorises both Central and State rule-making on declaration particulars. The State requirement for additional particulars did not conflict with the Central form F regime, and concurrent compliance was possible. No implied repeal or supersession arose, so the dealer had to furnish the particulars required by the State rule.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>