<?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>1995 (2) TMI 389 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157918</link>
    <description>The court held that the surcharge was not leviable as the appropriation of goods took place in a non-surcharge area, determining the situs of sale based on where the goods were at the time of their appropriation to the contract of sale. The passing of property and delivery terms were deemed irrelevant. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the Joint Commissioner&#039;s order, with no costs incurred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Oct 2013 13:32:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=308588" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (2) TMI 389 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157918</link>
      <description>The court held that the surcharge was not leviable as the appropriation of goods took place in a non-surcharge area, determining the situs of sale based on where the goods were at the time of their appropriation to the contract of sale. The passing of property and delivery terms were deemed irrelevant. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the Joint Commissioner&#039;s order, with no costs incurred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>