<?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>1987 (7) TMI 550 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155234</link>
    <description>An assessee running a hotel was found not to be a dealer in automobile spare parts merely because it sold spare parts received in settlement of accounts. The sale was a single, isolated transaction unconnected with the assessee&#039;s regular hotel business, and there was no basis to treat the assessee as carrying on a trading activity in motor parts. Rule 9(g) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, which recognises exemption where the original dealer had sold the goods, also supported the view that the limited disposal did not create dealer status. Assessment on the turnover from that sale was therefore unjustified and illegal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:21:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172265" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (7) TMI 550 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155234</link>
      <description>An assessee running a hotel was found not to be a dealer in automobile spare parts merely because it sold spare parts received in settlement of accounts. The sale was a single, isolated transaction unconnected with the assessee&#039;s regular hotel business, and there was no basis to treat the assessee as carrying on a trading activity in motor parts. Rule 9(g) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, which recognises exemption where the original dealer had sold the goods, also supported the view that the limited disposal did not create dealer status. Assessment on the turnover from that sale was therefore unjustified and illegal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>