<?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 (2) TMI 375 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156632</link>
    <description>Declared goods processed into M.S. round bars did not lose their character as goods within the relevant Schedule entry where the statutory description remained the same. Reading the definitions of &quot;manufacture&quot; and &quot;resale&quot; with rule 3(xvii), the Court held that the decisive test was whether the processed goods were taken out of the description of the declared goods in the Schedule. As iron scrap, ingots and round bars continued to fall within the description of &quot;iron and steel&quot;, the conversion was not treated as manufacture for denying the resale deduction. The sale therefore qualified as resale and the turnover deduction was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:53:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173658" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (2) TMI 375 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156632</link>
      <description>Declared goods processed into M.S. round bars did not lose their character as goods within the relevant Schedule entry where the statutory description remained the same. Reading the definitions of &quot;manufacture&quot; and &quot;resale&quot; with rule 3(xvii), the Court held that the decisive test was whether the processed goods were taken out of the description of the declared goods in the Schedule. As iron scrap, ingots and round bars continued to fall within the description of &quot;iron and steel&quot;, the conversion was not treated as manufacture for denying the resale deduction. The sale therefore qualified as resale and the turnover deduction was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>