<?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>1991 (6) TMI 221 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156232</link>
    <description>Sales promotion expenses were held to fall outside the limited scope of section 62(1)(e) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act because the provision concerns determination of tax on a sale, not recharacterisation of a separate charge as part of sale price. Packing materials supplied with goods were treated as part of an integrated sale on the factual finding that the goods were sold only in packed condition and no real separate purchase option existed. Separate bills and correspondence were insufficient to establish two distinct sales. Tax on the packing materials therefore followed the rate applicable to the goods sold, and the Revenue&#039;s view was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:54:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (6) TMI 221 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156232</link>
      <description>Sales promotion expenses were held to fall outside the limited scope of section 62(1)(e) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act because the provision concerns determination of tax on a sale, not recharacterisation of a separate charge as part of sale price. Packing materials supplied with goods were treated as part of an integrated sale on the factual finding that the goods were sold only in packed condition and no real separate purchase option existed. Separate bills and correspondence were insufficient to establish two distinct sales. Tax on the packing materials therefore followed the rate applicable to the goods sold, and the Revenue&#039;s view was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>