<?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>1996 (7) TMI 522 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158862</link>
    <description>Section 2(r) and Explanation (2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 were upheld as within the State&#039;s legislative competence because &quot;turnover&quot; could validly include amounts forming part of the consideration for sale or purchase. Rule 6(c) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 was also sustained, as the distinction between sale and purchase turnover had a rational nexus with the tax scheme and was not discriminatory. Planting, varietal, seed, chemical and transport subsidies, together with development charges linked to the supply arrangement, were held includible in the purchase turnover of sugarcane because they formed part of the price structure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2013 16:28:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335008" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (7) TMI 522 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158862</link>
      <description>Section 2(r) and Explanation (2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 were upheld as within the State&#039;s legislative competence because &quot;turnover&quot; could validly include amounts forming part of the consideration for sale or purchase. Rule 6(c) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 was also sustained, as the distinction between sale and purchase turnover had a rational nexus with the tax scheme and was not discriminatory. Planting, varietal, seed, chemical and transport subsidies, together with development charges linked to the supply arrangement, were held includible in the purchase turnover of sugarcane because they formed part of the price structure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>