<?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>1990 (1) TMI 288 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156221</link>
    <description>Sale proceeds from an elephant were treated as proceeds from goods, but inclusion in taxable turnover depended on whether the transaction formed part of the assessee&#039;s business. As there was no finding that the elephant was a business asset, the broader definition of business did not, by itself, bring the sale within taxable turnover. The sale proceeds were therefore not includible in taxable turnover, and the revision failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:06:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (1) TMI 288 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156221</link>
      <description>Sale proceeds from an elephant were treated as proceeds from goods, but inclusion in taxable turnover depended on whether the transaction formed part of the assessee&#039;s business. As there was no finding that the elephant was a business asset, the broader definition of business did not, by itself, bring the sale within taxable turnover. The sale proceeds were therefore not includible in taxable turnover, and the revision failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>