<?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>1993 (1) TMI 259 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157068</link>
    <description>Dried chicory roots were not treated as fresh vegetables or edible tubers under the popular parlance test, and they were not shown to fall within flower, fruit or vegetable seeds, bulbs, tubers or similar plants covered by the exemption entries in Schedule I to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. The classification dispute turned on whether the goods answered those entry descriptions; because the goods were dried chicory roots and not tubers fit for growing fresh plants, the exemption provisions did not apply. The Tribunal&#039;s view that entry 8 and entry 23 were inapplicable was upheld, and the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 11:06:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (1) TMI 259 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157068</link>
      <description>Dried chicory roots were not treated as fresh vegetables or edible tubers under the popular parlance test, and they were not shown to fall within flower, fruit or vegetable seeds, bulbs, tubers or similar plants covered by the exemption entries in Schedule I to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. The classification dispute turned on whether the goods answered those entry descriptions; because the goods were dried chicory roots and not tubers fit for growing fresh plants, the exemption provisions did not apply. The Tribunal&#039;s view that entry 8 and entry 23 were inapplicable was upheld, and the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157068</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>