<?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 (12) TMI 157 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153507</link>
    <description>Cotton pillow cases were held to fall outside both &quot;cotton fabrics&quot; and &quot;cotton garments&quot; for sales tax purposes: applying the common parlance and commercial identity tests, the court noted that pillow cases are distinct marketable goods with their own use and do not cover any part of the human body, so the claimed exemption was unavailable. On reassessment, section 14(4)(cc) could not be used merely because the authority later changed its view; the provision applies only where exemption was wrongly allowed on the facts and law as they then stood. Notices based only on a change of opinion were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:03:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170542" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (12) TMI 157 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153507</link>
      <description>Cotton pillow cases were held to fall outside both &quot;cotton fabrics&quot; and &quot;cotton garments&quot; for sales tax purposes: applying the common parlance and commercial identity tests, the court noted that pillow cases are distinct marketable goods with their own use and do not cover any part of the human body, so the claimed exemption was unavailable. On reassessment, section 14(4)(cc) could not be used merely because the authority later changed its view; the provision applies only where exemption was wrongly allowed on the facts and law as they then stood. Notices based only on a change of opinion were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>