<?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>1984 (11) TMI 294 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154288</link>
    <description>Mere felling and sale of spontaneously grown shade trees by plantation owners did not, by itself, make them dealers under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. The text explains that a casual trader must engage in occasional transactions of a business nature, amounting to a business venture or adventure in trade, and that only goods produced by the seller can fall within the relevant dealer definitions. Because spontaneous tree growth is not production by the seller, and the timber was not shown to be the product of antecedent cultivation or nurturing, the sales were treated as outside those statutory definitions. The revisional orders were therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Aug 2013 17:49:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171321" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (11) TMI 294 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154288</link>
      <description>Mere felling and sale of spontaneously grown shade trees by plantation owners did not, by itself, make them dealers under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. The text explains that a casual trader must engage in occasional transactions of a business nature, amounting to a business venture or adventure in trade, and that only goods produced by the seller can fall within the relevant dealer definitions. Because spontaneous tree growth is not production by the seller, and the timber was not shown to be the product of antecedent cultivation or nurturing, the sales were treated as outside those statutory definitions. The revisional orders were therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>