<?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 (1) TMI 496 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159150</link>
    <description>A taxing notification deleting specified goods from entry 34 of the Fifth Schedule and fixing sales tax at 4 per cent from 1 April 1991 applied to those goods generally, not only to two-wheelers sold through canteen stores. Read with Section 8 and the scheme of the Fifth Schedule, the deletion removed the exemption previously available to canteen-store sales, and the reduced rate operated on the plain terms of the notification itself. The court noted that a tax exemption or rate-reduction notification must be construed strictly, and no narrower limitation could be implied. A later notification operative from 1 April 1992 also confirmed that the earlier notification was not confined to canteen-store sales.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Nov 2013 14:32:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 496 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159150</link>
      <description>A taxing notification deleting specified goods from entry 34 of the Fifth Schedule and fixing sales tax at 4 per cent from 1 April 1991 applied to those goods generally, not only to two-wheelers sold through canteen stores. Read with Section 8 and the scheme of the Fifth Schedule, the deletion removed the exemption previously available to canteen-store sales, and the reduced rate operated on the plain terms of the notification itself. The court noted that a tax exemption or rate-reduction notification must be construed strictly, and no narrower limitation could be implied. A later notification operative from 1 April 1992 also confirmed that the earlier notification was not confined to canteen-store sales.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>