<?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 (11) TMI 260 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154081</link>
    <description>Sales of medicines against form D for Employees&#039; State Insurance hospitals and dispensaries were treated as sales to the State Government under section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, because the purchases were made by State Government officers, funded from State resources, and undertaken in discharge of the State&#039;s statutory duty to provide medical benefit. The assessing authority could verify the genuineness of form D, but could not go behind the declaration to examine the ultimate consumption of the goods. On that basis, the higher rate of tax was not justified and the impugned assessments and demand notices were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2013 17:05:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (11) TMI 260 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154081</link>
      <description>Sales of medicines against form D for Employees&#039; State Insurance hospitals and dispensaries were treated as sales to the State Government under section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, because the purchases were made by State Government officers, funded from State resources, and undertaken in discharge of the State&#039;s statutory duty to provide medical benefit. The assessing authority could verify the genuineness of form D, but could not go behind the declaration to examine the ultimate consumption of the goods. On that basis, the higher rate of tax was not justified and the impugned assessments and demand notices were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154081</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>