<?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>1986 (10) TMI 313 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154825</link>
    <description>Goods taxed under the U.P. Sales of Motor Spirit, Diesel Oil and Alcohol Taxation Act, 1939 at the point of first purchase only were treated as exempt from tax generally for the purpose of section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Section 8(2A) applies where State law grants general exemption or a generally lower rate, and its Explanation excludes only conditional exemptions, stage-specific levies, or levies unrelated to turnover. The levy under section 3(1)(c) was held to be a tax on alcohol at the first purchase stage without qualifying conditions, so the Explanation did not apply. The dealer was therefore entitled to nil Central sales tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 16:10:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171856" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (10) TMI 313 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154825</link>
      <description>Goods taxed under the U.P. Sales of Motor Spirit, Diesel Oil and Alcohol Taxation Act, 1939 at the point of first purchase only were treated as exempt from tax generally for the purpose of section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Section 8(2A) applies where State law grants general exemption or a generally lower rate, and its Explanation excludes only conditional exemptions, stage-specific levies, or levies unrelated to turnover. The levy under section 3(1)(c) was held to be a tax on alcohol at the first purchase stage without qualifying conditions, so the Explanation did not apply. The dealer was therefore entitled to nil Central sales tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154825</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>