https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159227 Additional sales tax could not grant a higher turnover threshold to local dealers while denying it to similarly situated dealers whose principals or head offices were outside the State. That distinction imposed different tax burdens based on the dealer's location, directly impeded trade and commerce, and violated Articles 301, 303 and 304(a); the levy was invalid to that extent. The classification of casual traders and agents of non-resident dealers for administrative and assessment purposes was not arbitrary and did not violate Article 14. The discriminatory words were severable, so the higher exemption threshold applied uniformly to all dealers while the remaining levy continued to operate. en-us Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Nov 2013 14:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159227 Additional sales tax could not grant a higher turnover threshold to local dealers while denying it to similarly situated dealers whose principals or head offices were outside the State. That distinction imposed different tax burdens based on the dealer's location, directly impeded trade and commerce, and violated Articles 301, 303 and 304(a); the levy was invalid to that extent. The classification of casual traders and agents of non-resident dealers for administrative and assessment purposes was not arbitrary and did not violate Article 14. The discriminatory words were severable, so the higher exemption threshold applied uniformly to all dealers while the remaining levy continued to operate. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159227