<?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>2003 (11) TMI 556 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158847</link>
    <description>Goods purchased from unregistered dealers and later sold in the course of export were held not to escape purchase tax merely because the sale situs was within the State. The analysis distinguishes export sales under section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 from local or intra-State sales for purposes of section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. A sale protected as an export sale under Article 286(1) and section 5(3) is not a &quot;sale in the State&quot; simply because title passes there. The prior purchase therefore remained exigible to purchase tax under the State enactment, and the levy was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 556 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158847</link>
      <description>Goods purchased from unregistered dealers and later sold in the course of export were held not to escape purchase tax merely because the sale situs was within the State. The analysis distinguishes export sales under section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 from local or intra-State sales for purposes of section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. A sale protected as an export sale under Article 286(1) and section 5(3) is not a &quot;sale in the State&quot; simply because title passes there. The prior purchase therefore remained exigible to purchase tax under the State enactment, and the levy was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>