<?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>1992 (1) TMI 335 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159464</link>
    <description>The pre-16 August 1991 concessional sales tax provision was construed to cover sales to Government and to entities within the statutory scheme of delegated governmental authority. The Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council, constituted as an autonomous body performing specified functions under State control, was treated as a delegated authority of the State Government for those functions and not as a corporation established under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. The later amendment extending the benefit to the Council supported that construction. The challenge to the affidavit authorization did not affect the Council&#039;s substantive entitlement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 18:26:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (1) TMI 335 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159464</link>
      <description>The pre-16 August 1991 concessional sales tax provision was construed to cover sales to Government and to entities within the statutory scheme of delegated governmental authority. The Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council, constituted as an autonomous body performing specified functions under State control, was treated as a delegated authority of the State Government for those functions and not as a corporation established under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. The later amendment extending the benefit to the Council supported that construction. The challenge to the affidavit authorization did not affect the Council&#039;s substantive entitlement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159464</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>