<?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 (3) TMI 382 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157653</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision and dismissed the tax revision case, emphasizing the distinction between cash discount and other types of rebates in the context of taxable turnover under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Court found that the rebate allowed in the course of business was not liable to be taxed as it did not form part of the sale price, in line with previous judgments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2013 11:40:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (3) TMI 382 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157653</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision and dismissed the tax revision case, emphasizing the distinction between cash discount and other types of rebates in the context of taxable turnover under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Court found that the rebate allowed in the course of business was not liable to be taxed as it did not form part of the sale price, in line with previous judgments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157653</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>