<?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 (6) TMI 239 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157667</link>
    <description>Dyeing and related processing of customers&#039; fabrics were treated as a works contract under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act where goods used in execution retained some form in the processed fabric by accession or accretion. On that basis, the value of chemicals retained in the fabric could be brought within section 6D, while bleaching alone, which merely removed impurities and did not leave goods in the fabric, was outside that extent. The constitutional challenge under article 286 failed because the saving provision preserved the limits on tax over outside-State, import and export sales, so the deemed sale provision was not invalid on that ground.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:27:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (6) TMI 239 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157667</link>
      <description>Dyeing and related processing of customers&#039; fabrics were treated as a works contract under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act where goods used in execution retained some form in the processed fabric by accession or accretion. On that basis, the value of chemicals retained in the fabric could be brought within section 6D, while bleaching alone, which merely removed impurities and did not leave goods in the fabric, was outside that extent. The constitutional challenge under article 286 failed because the saving provision preserved the limits on tax over outside-State, import and export sales, so the deemed sale provision was not invalid on that ground.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>