<?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>1999 (3) TMI 604 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159791</link>
    <description>Unmachined cast iron castings were treated as declared goods under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act and the Fourth Schedule, because the distinction between rough castings and finished machined products did not justify classifying them as unclassified goods under section 5(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The assessment treating those sales at a higher or unclassified rate was therefore unsustainable. The constitutional challenge to the proviso inserted into section 5(1) by Act No. 18 of 1994 was rejected, as the provision could be construed consistently with the statutory scheme rather than struck down as ultra vires.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2013 12:43:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 604 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159791</link>
      <description>Unmachined cast iron castings were treated as declared goods under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act and the Fourth Schedule, because the distinction between rough castings and finished machined products did not justify classifying them as unclassified goods under section 5(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The assessment treating those sales at a higher or unclassified rate was therefore unsustainable. The constitutional challenge to the proviso inserted into section 5(1) by Act No. 18 of 1994 was rejected, as the provision could be construed consistently with the statutory scheme rather than struck down as ultra vires.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>