<?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 (3) TMI 505 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155464</link>
    <description>The statutory reduction of tax for rice procured from paddy allowed only the prescribed set-off of tax already levied on paddy and did not create any right to refund or reimbursement when the sale price of rice fell below the cost of paddy. The Andhra Pradesh HC held that the word &quot;reduced&quot; in the sales tax scheme could not be read as &quot;reimbursed&quot; or as authorising repayment of tax on paddy. It also held that once the amending Act deleted the earlier schedule entry and substituted a new one, the proviso attached to the deleted entry could not survive independently. The assessees therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 15:54:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172495" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (3) TMI 505 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155464</link>
      <description>The statutory reduction of tax for rice procured from paddy allowed only the prescribed set-off of tax already levied on paddy and did not create any right to refund or reimbursement when the sale price of rice fell below the cost of paddy. The Andhra Pradesh HC held that the word &quot;reduced&quot; in the sales tax scheme could not be read as &quot;reimbursed&quot; or as authorising repayment of tax on paddy. It also held that once the amending Act deleted the earlier schedule entry and substituted a new one, the proviso attached to the deleted entry could not survive independently. The assessees therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155464</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>