<?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 1116 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238661</link>
    <description>A penultimate sale qualifies for export exemption where the local sale is inseverably and integrally connected with the export transaction and forms an inextricable part of the movement of goods to the foreign buyer. Applying that test, the distinction between rough granite blocks and polished granite slabs did not defeat the claim for exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1958. The Revenue&#039;s further objection based on the absence of a prior agreement was not considered because it had not been raised before the Tribunal. The assessee was therefore held entitled to the exemption, and the Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333584" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 1116 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238661</link>
      <description>A penultimate sale qualifies for export exemption where the local sale is inseverably and integrally connected with the export transaction and forms an inextricable part of the movement of goods to the foreign buyer. Applying that test, the distinction between rough granite blocks and polished granite slabs did not defeat the claim for exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1958. The Revenue&#039;s further objection based on the absence of a prior agreement was not considered because it had not been raised before the Tribunal. The assessee was therefore held entitled to the exemption, and the Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>