<?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 (2) TMI 293 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156430</link>
    <description>Exemption from tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act applied only if the manufacturer proved that purchased gold or silver articles were used in making goods sold by him and that tax had been paid on the manufactured articles. Because the assessment excluded purchase turnover without examining those statutory conditions or giving reasons, revisional interference was justified to prevent revenue loss, and the show-cause notice was held valid. The pendency of another writ petition on a similar issue did not prevent the Court from deciding the matter before it, so no procedural bar arose. The challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:51:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (2) TMI 293 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156430</link>
      <description>Exemption from tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act applied only if the manufacturer proved that purchased gold or silver articles were used in making goods sold by him and that tax had been paid on the manufactured articles. Because the assessment excluded purchase turnover without examining those statutory conditions or giving reasons, revisional interference was justified to prevent revenue loss, and the show-cause notice was held valid. The pendency of another writ petition on a similar issue did not prevent the Court from deciding the matter before it, so no procedural bar arose. The challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>