<?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>1992 (8) TMI 250 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157035</link>
    <description>Brand-name based single-point taxation of food applied to bottled pickles sold under a trade mark registered under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Registration took effect from the application date, so turnover from bottled pickles sold under that registered name was liable to the single-point levy. Packet pickles could not be included merely because bottled pickles bore the registered brand: sales of packet pickles were not shown to have been made under that brand name and therefore did not meet the entry&#039;s condition. The tax on bottled pickles was sustained, while the levy on packet-pickle turnover was excluded and required reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2013 18:16:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (8) TMI 250 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157035</link>
      <description>Brand-name based single-point taxation of food applied to bottled pickles sold under a trade mark registered under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Registration took effect from the application date, so turnover from bottled pickles sold under that registered name was liable to the single-point levy. Packet pickles could not be included merely because bottled pickles bore the registered brand: sales of packet pickles were not shown to have been made under that brand name and therefore did not meet the entry&#039;s condition. The tax on bottled pickles was sustained, while the levy on packet-pickle turnover was excluded and required reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>