<?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 (4) TMI 229 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157185</link>
    <description>For sales tax purposes, a genuine sale to an intermediary remains the first taxable sale where the assessee contracts with that buyer, invoices it directly, and receives only the agreed price, even if the goods are delivered to a third party under a separate downstream arrangement. The revenue cannot ignore that transaction or tax the assessee on the intermediary&#039;s higher resale price without proof that the arrangement is a sham or colourable device. A transaction may be disregarded only on material showing lack of commercial reality and tax-driven structuring; on the facts stated, brand value and goodwill explained the higher resale price, and the assessee&#039;s turnover was confined to the consideration actually received.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:49:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174210" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (4) TMI 229 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157185</link>
      <description>For sales tax purposes, a genuine sale to an intermediary remains the first taxable sale where the assessee contracts with that buyer, invoices it directly, and receives only the agreed price, even if the goods are delivered to a third party under a separate downstream arrangement. The revenue cannot ignore that transaction or tax the assessee on the intermediary&#039;s higher resale price without proof that the arrangement is a sham or colourable device. A transaction may be disregarded only on material showing lack of commercial reality and tax-driven structuring; on the facts stated, brand value and goodwill explained the higher resale price, and the assessee&#039;s turnover was confined to the consideration actually received.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157185</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>