<?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 (8) TMI 366 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156414</link>
    <description>Despatches of petroleum products to companies outside the State under a product exchange arrangement were treated as a sale under section 2(g) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 because the assessee ultimately received the monetary value of the goods through its agent. The movement of goods outside the State brought the transaction within the inter-State trade framework of sections 3 and 6, and the later receipt of price showed that the transfer was not confined to barter but amounted to transfer for valuable consideration by deferred payment. On that basis, the despatches were taxable as inter-State sales, and the issue was answered against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 14:35:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (8) TMI 366 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156414</link>
      <description>Despatches of petroleum products to companies outside the State under a product exchange arrangement were treated as a sale under section 2(g) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 because the assessee ultimately received the monetary value of the goods through its agent. The movement of goods outside the State brought the transaction within the inter-State trade framework of sections 3 and 6, and the later receipt of price showed that the transfer was not confined to barter but amounted to transfer for valuable consideration by deferred payment. On that basis, the despatches were taxable as inter-State sales, and the issue was answered against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156414</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>