https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153566 Additional tax under section 6-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was not shown to be confiscatory merely because it reduced or eliminated the petitioner's business profit; the levy was upheld because a loss of margin, without more, does not invalidate a tax. The petitioner was also held liable for sales tax, surcharge and additional tax as the first seller of cement in the State, since title passed on the high seas and the transaction attracted section 5(3); the writ challenge also failed because the statutory appeal remedy under section 20 had not been exhausted. en-us Fri, 12 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:27:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153566 Additional tax under section 6-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was not shown to be confiscatory merely because it reduced or eliminated the petitioner's business profit; the levy was upheld because a loss of margin, without more, does not invalidate a tax. The petitioner was also held liable for sales tax, surcharge and additional tax as the first seller of cement in the State, since title passed on the high seas and the transaction attracted section 5(3); the writ challenge also failed because the statutory appeal remedy under section 20 had not been exhausted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 12 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153566