<?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>2013 (10) TMI 590 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238135</link>
    <description>Processed ready-to-eat maize snacks such as cheese balls and tortilla chips did not retain the substantial identity or essential nature of maize for classification under Serial No. 80, Part B of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Court applied the substantial identity and essential nature tests and found that further processing, including flavouring, seasoning and frying or baking, created distinct snack foods rather than maize products. The mere use of maize as a base ingredient was insufficient, and the branded nature of the goods supported assessment under the residuary entry. The goods were therefore taxable as unclassified goods under the residuary provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2013 10:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=329892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 590 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238135</link>
      <description>Processed ready-to-eat maize snacks such as cheese balls and tortilla chips did not retain the substantial identity or essential nature of maize for classification under Serial No. 80, Part B of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Court applied the substantial identity and essential nature tests and found that further processing, including flavouring, seasoning and frying or baking, created distinct snack foods rather than maize products. The mere use of maize as a base ingredient was insufficient, and the branded nature of the goods supported assessment under the residuary entry. The goods were therefore taxable as unclassified goods under the residuary provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238135</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>