<?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 (9) TMI 394 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155455</link>
    <description>For purposes of section 8(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the rate of tax under the appropriate State law includes surcharge imposed as an additional levy on the same taxable sale. The Andhra Pradesh High Court reasoned that section 8(2-A) is not limited to the bare tax percentage but covers the effective burden payable under the State enactment, including surcharge under section 6-B of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. Applying that construction, the surcharge formed part of the applicable rate for inter-State sales of declared goods, so the Central sales tax liability included the surcharge component and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 15:26:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (9) TMI 394 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155455</link>
      <description>For purposes of section 8(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the rate of tax under the appropriate State law includes surcharge imposed as an additional levy on the same taxable sale. The Andhra Pradesh High Court reasoned that section 8(2-A) is not limited to the bare tax percentage but covers the effective burden payable under the State enactment, including surcharge under section 6-B of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. Applying that construction, the surcharge formed part of the applicable rate for inter-State sales of declared goods, so the Central sales tax liability included the surcharge component and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>