<?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>2012 (11) TMI 696 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218681</link>
    <description>A statutory entry tax concession for scheduled goods purchased as raw material cannot be denied by adding conditions not found in Rule 3(4) or Form E-15, so branch transfer of finished goods outside Odisha and absence of local sale did not by themselves defeat the concession. Section 26 and Rule 19, which deal with tax on sale of finished products, could not be used to refuse the raw-material concession. Coal used in a captive power plant to generate electricity was not raw material for sponge iron, billets or HR coil and fell outside the concession. Returned finished goods required fresh verification because further entry tax depended on whether tax had already been suffered on sale within the State.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2014 14:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 696 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218681</link>
      <description>A statutory entry tax concession for scheduled goods purchased as raw material cannot be denied by adding conditions not found in Rule 3(4) or Form E-15, so branch transfer of finished goods outside Odisha and absence of local sale did not by themselves defeat the concession. Section 26 and Rule 19, which deal with tax on sale of finished products, could not be used to refuse the raw-material concession. Coal used in a captive power plant to generate electricity was not raw material for sponge iron, billets or HR coil and fell outside the concession. Returned finished goods required fresh verification because further entry tax depended on whether tax had already been suffered on sale within the State.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>