<?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>1998 (4) TMI 506 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159111</link>
    <description>Beer purchased and taxed before 1 April 1990 was not eligible for exemption on subsequent sale under section 5(1-A) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The provision, as amended from that date, imposed multi-point tax on beer and allowed deduction only for turnover already taxed under section 5(1-A) at the immediately preceding point of sale. Its separate proviso granted only a limited exemption for a specified prior period, and that protection did not extend to goods already taxed before the commencement of section 5(1-A). The statutory language was clear, so the appellant&#039;s reliance on interpretive authorities failed and the exemption claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:28:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335778" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 506 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159111</link>
      <description>Beer purchased and taxed before 1 April 1990 was not eligible for exemption on subsequent sale under section 5(1-A) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The provision, as amended from that date, imposed multi-point tax on beer and allowed deduction only for turnover already taxed under section 5(1-A) at the immediately preceding point of sale. Its separate proviso granted only a limited exemption for a specified prior period, and that protection did not extend to goods already taxed before the commencement of section 5(1-A). The statutory language was clear, so the appellant&#039;s reliance on interpretive authorities failed and the exemption claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>