<?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 (4) TMI 235 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159584</link>
    <description>A wet grinder fitted with a separately purchased motor did not become a different taxable commodity, so sales tax could not be levied again on the grinder after attachment of the motor. The earlier tax on the motor purchase was sufficient, because the article retained its identity for tax purposes. Penalty for belated filing of return under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was also not sustained, the issue being controlled by the governing precedent and the appellate authority having already set aside the penalty without discussion. The assessee therefore succeeded on both issues, and the adverse assessment order did not survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:15:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (4) TMI 235 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159584</link>
      <description>A wet grinder fitted with a separately purchased motor did not become a different taxable commodity, so sales tax could not be levied again on the grinder after attachment of the motor. The earlier tax on the motor purchase was sufficient, because the article retained its identity for tax purposes. Penalty for belated filing of return under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was also not sustained, the issue being controlled by the governing precedent and the appellate authority having already set aside the penalty without discussion. The assessee therefore succeeded on both issues, and the adverse assessment order did not survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>