<?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>1988 (7) TMI 390 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155853</link>
    <description>Section 13AA of the Bombay Sales Tax Act was treated as a purchase tax on raw materials, with later manufacture and despatch outside the State acting only as conditions that triggered postponed liability; the taxable event remained the original purchase, so the levy fell within State legislative competence under entry 54 of List II and not entry 92-B of List I. The levy was also held not to breach article 301 because it was a non-discriminatory tax without direct or immediate restriction on trade, and the procedural requirement under article 304(b) was satisfied. The classification based on use of raw material and branch transfer was upheld as rational under article 14.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2016 13:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (7) TMI 390 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155853</link>
      <description>Section 13AA of the Bombay Sales Tax Act was treated as a purchase tax on raw materials, with later manufacture and despatch outside the State acting only as conditions that triggered postponed liability; the taxable event remained the original purchase, so the levy fell within State legislative competence under entry 54 of List II and not entry 92-B of List I. The levy was also held not to breach article 301 because it was a non-discriminatory tax without direct or immediate restriction on trade, and the procedural requirement under article 304(b) was satisfied. The classification based on use of raw material and branch transfer was upheld as rational under article 14.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155853</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>