<?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 (2) TMI 502 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155522</link>
    <description>Bottles and crates supplied with beer were treated as part of the taxable turnover because the surrounding commercial facts showed a sale rather than a true bailment. The security deposit, absence of supporting verification from the books, and the practical manner in which the transactions were carried out indicated that customers did not merely hold the receptacles temporarily for return. The later return of bottles and crates was treated as a separate subsequent transaction in favour of the company, not as evidence that ownership had remained with it. The assessee&#039;s claim that the containers were only refundable-property arrangements was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:54:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172553" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 502 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155522</link>
      <description>Bottles and crates supplied with beer were treated as part of the taxable turnover because the surrounding commercial facts showed a sale rather than a true bailment. The security deposit, absence of supporting verification from the books, and the practical manner in which the transactions were carried out indicated that customers did not merely hold the receptacles temporarily for return. The later return of bottles and crates was treated as a separate subsequent transaction in favour of the company, not as evidence that ownership had remained with it. The assessee&#039;s claim that the containers were only refundable-property arrangements was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155522</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>