<?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>2013 (12) TMI 501 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240836</link>
    <description>Goods purchased and converted into commercially distinct mosaic tiles before supply, laying and polishing at customers&#039; sites were not used in the execution of a works contract in the same form, so the exemption under section 3B(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was unavailable and the assessment on tax liability was sustained. Penalty was not justified to the extent upheld because the turnover was recorded in the books and the dispute concerned the character of the transaction and the allowable deduction; accordingly, the penalty was deleted. Relief was therefore confined to the penalty and limited labour-charges deduction issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 501 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240836</link>
      <description>Goods purchased and converted into commercially distinct mosaic tiles before supply, laying and polishing at customers&#039; sites were not used in the execution of a works contract in the same form, so the exemption under section 3B(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was unavailable and the assessment on tax liability was sustained. Penalty was not justified to the extent upheld because the turnover was recorded in the books and the dispute concerned the character of the transaction and the allowable deduction; accordingly, the penalty was deleted. Relief was therefore confined to the penalty and limited labour-charges deduction issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>